craig

JR Matthes has incredibly compiled 2.48 ERA at Iowa. They have gotten some remarkable pitching, from some non-regarded prospects. Gallagher was very good there, obviously as a status guy. But Burns, Matthes, and Wells have put up some really good ERA's, even while the status guys Hart and Marshall have gotten ripped. I wonder if Matthes isn't basically what the good Marshall was supposed to be? Marques Smith didn't play for Peoria today. My guess is that he's on the move to Daytona, and will play the full second half with Daytona.

McDaniel and Sontag. McDaniel is 14th rounder who just turned 20. Had bad stats, but apparently was pitching most of the year with injured ribs.

Heh, my mistake, I checked BB-cube, which doesn't include 2008. So Opitz hadn't hit over .300 previous years, with no power, and with a lot more K's than Harrison. Yeah, that's a pretty good 2008 for Opitz. (Was he a senior, just a really old junior, I don't remember?) Is the Big East that bad of a conference? I know it's not SEC good, but being conference player of the year there, it's not like it's a bad conference. Obviously Garrison may be a total fiasco, and may not hit at all. Most 6th rounders don't pan out. And obviously he's not going to hit many HR's. And I know it's obvious that the Cubs can make some pretty dumb picks sometimes. And I also know this isn't thinking for myself, it's just trusting the Cub scouts who have no track record of deserving trust; but I still think if they took him in the 6th and Opitz in the 12th, the Cubs at least think he's much better, and the odds are they are correct. I like him better because he's been a consistent contact hitter every year, and I think contact hitters/slap hitters can progress pretty well. Contact hitters who lack HR power but have no holes can be better able to handle improved pitching, whereas the boom-or-bust stronger guys have a harder time handling promotions. If you are a contact guy at one level who consistently takes a lot of walks and has very few K's, that impresses me as perhaps having the most fundamental hitting tool, the ability to see pitches well, and to respond to them accurately. That Harrison can respond accurately but still not hit the ball over the wall is a major limitation, but Opitz hasn't power either, and if I could get a good-average good-OBP disciplined 2B in the 6th round, that would be a good value even if he doesn't hit for power. We'll see how it goes.

Vance, what did Shark look like for fastball and breaking ball?

Not the right topic, I think. But I noticed a kid who debuted in the DSL box score, Ramon Garcia. He lists at 6'2", 170, 16 years old. Pitched 2.1 innings, no hits, one walk, and 5 K's. Might be one to keep an eye on?

I'd rather keep Harrison in the infield. He was drafted 6th round to Opitz's 12th, is a year younger, and was the Big East player of the year. He's got some very impressive BB/K ratios in college, and has been an outstanding OBP guy, with an OBP around .440 for his college career and an OPS around .960 or so. Opitz has been more a career .280 hitter (in college!) with an OBP more in the .370 range and OPS around .790. So I'd rather go with Harrison, and hope he has enough OBP/bat to be something in the Derosa/Theriot class of hitter as a 2B.

James O'Donnell has signed, since he's on the Boise roster. Flaherty is also on the roster, so that signing is further confirmed if there was still any question about it.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/sports/story/410788.html Initial roster. Vitters 3B, Flaherty SS, Harrison SS, Opitz and Marwin Gonzalez for utility, Rebel Riding and Keedy for 1B. (My interpretation of usage.) Some of those guys will need to do some OF, because the only listed OFers are Burke, Rundle, and CF Campana. C: Flores, Brenly, and Carlos Perez. A zillion pitchers from the draft, so hard to guess who will start and who will pitch relief. James O'Donnell in there, so he signed. My first guess at the starters might be: Hatley, Jay Johnson, Coleman, Pawelek, and Jose Pina. Not sure if Pawelek or Pina have enough control or in Pina's case rehab progress to start though. The list has 14 pitchers, so it will be kind of chaotic spring-training-like or like how they do the rookie league team at first.

I may be misremembering, but I thought Kemp was on a short visa and would need to get sent out soon.

Gray obviously doesn't plan to sign. But the guys who are available in the 27th round are mostly either college guys who will be roster-fillers, or HS/JC guys who you probable can't sign or else aren't very talented. So you take a pick, and wonder if he'll maybe change his mind? Sometimes teenagers do. He might be wise to do so. Somebody observed that his delivery is incredibly violent, and that there's a good chance that he'll need surgery before he becomes eligible to be drafted again. Might be wise to take some the money while he can. But, obviously that isn't his plan. On the HS thing: I think there has been a dramatic reduction in the number of HSers drafted since they dumped the draft-and-follow process. At present, will the team offer enough to make it better for the kid to sign than to go to college? Seems to me that unless the signing bonus is $150K (top 5 rounds area), the kid is better to get free college, have all the fun and personal development that comes with college, and then have chance to make a million (or more) as a college pick. Why should I sign for 7th round money? If I'm going to become a good major leaguer, then I'll have elevated to 1st-2nd round status by my junior year, so financially I'm as well off in college. If I'm not going to become a good major leaguer, then it would be better for me to get free college, be prepared for a life after baseball, be a star athlete on campus with lots of girlfriends and team camaraderie, rather than to experience night after night of frustration as a failing inadequate low-minors bust. My point is, for the average kid, either he needs to be a high-draft pick who gets a high-dollar bonus, or else he should go to college. In the DFE days, of course, the team could draft the kid without committing 1st/2nd round money to a kid who might but probably won't work out; then if he did blossom, pay him that via draft and follow.

It's too soon to tell. This is Guyer's first month in pro ball, after being injured for quite a while. So it's not clear that his 65 AB sample is very representative. In his brief 65 AB, he's got 3 HR's and 8 XBH, with an IsoP well over .200. Small sample fluke, maybe, but if he could power like that while hitting .280 instead of .245, you could have a good guy. With only 11K/65 AB, that's pretty good in the early going. His BABIP is only around .250. If his other numbers sustain but his BABIP is around .300 or better (most decent minor-league hitters BABIP well over .300), then you'd be looking at a .280+ hitter with power, and we might like it. We'll have to wait and see. As a 5th round draftee with injury issues, the odds that he's going to be an exciting prospect aren't very high. But if he hits, and with some power, who knows?

To be honest, I think the awesome "bad body" hitter versus the flashy athlete thing doesn't apply at all to the Cub recent drafts. Vitters was not at all a "flashy athlete", he was taken for bat, bat bat. Cerda and the Cinci kid this draft are not "flashy athletes", they are drafted as hit-first. Flaherty similiar, he's no flashy athlete, or an NFL wide receiver or any of that stuff. The same applies to last year in addition to Vitters. Donaldson, Thomas, the Oklahoma State guy who's at Daytona, Marques Smith, these guys were all taken for their hitting, at the expense of "flashy athlete" tools. Nobody says Thomas is a flashy athlete gold-glove base-stealing burner; all of these guys were hit-first, and hope they can be average or a little better defensively. Clevenger was the same kind of deal two years ago, nobody said he was fast or a flashy fielder, they just thought he could hit. If anything, I think the complain that they are going too light on "flashy athleticism" might be more justifiable at present. So I think the "trend" that I see is a focus on hitting skills (hitting for contact in particular) above all. That actually seems to apply to Colvin as well, they said they saw him as a pure hitter. Obviously not everybody drafted to hit actually does. So I can certainly share the logic that drafting for hitting is fine, but if your scouting stinks so that the guys you drafted to hit can't actually hit it's lose-lose-lose. I'm still hopeful that some of the guys that haven't hit that well will do so (Vitters, Thomas, and perhaps even Colvin and Donaldson).

Any observations on Rhee's stuff since the DL? Nate? Is he throwing softer, or looking like he's not letting it go as easily? 3 good innings today, 6/0 GO/AO. Blake Parker with another 3 shutout innings, no walks. Nice to see Thomas hot. Nice to see Veal with some K's, and a pretty good line.

DeRosa seems a good comp, in part because DeRosa is the current 2B and if Flaherty was to progress really well/fast (as might be possible), he might possibly be in the mix for 2B after DeRosa's contract runs out. They've been wanting a left-handed 2B. If he could hit and reach base like Todd Walker, while fielding a little better than DeRosa and being baseball smart unlike Walker, that would be a great value for a pick in the 40's. Obviously not a very exciting pick. His K's were way up this junior year, and his batting average well down. Awful lot of K's (over 40 K's in college this year!) to be a Wally Joyner-type average hitter.

"They [the Mets] could go for pitching help with Friedrich, Cashner or Perry, with the idea of converting the latter two from relievers to starters." Callis, BA. The notion of drafting a college reliever, than switching him to rotation, seems surprising. I wonder if other teams are looking at these guys this way?

Thanks for the observations. Yes, Spears came from Baltimore in the corey Patterson trade. Your observation fits with what I recall reading and hearing: that he's an average minor league 2B, not horrible but nothing special either, and would likely be below average relative to big-league 2B's. (The same might be said for Fontenot or Patterson, more or less.) At present, Fontenot works because DeRosa plays 3rd, so even though Fontenot can't play 3rd, essentially he can replace either DeRosa or Aram, so Lou's OK with that. But on most teams, it's hard to make the roster as a one-position rookie sub. If Spears could show the ability to play 3B as well as 2nd, I think he'd have a better chance of eventually accumulating some big-league service time.

Cal or anybody, what do we know about Nate Spears's defense? Is he a Fontenot-like liability, or is he viewed as a good-fielding 2B? I've kind of completely forgotten about him after he started slow at Daytona two seasons ago. But his OPS in AA last year was over .800 and he's up around .800 now, with OBP in the .380's. He's been a consistent IsoD guy in the .080+ range, and he's 20BB/18K this year. No power, but he bats LH, so I'm wondering whether down the road he might be a candidate to be a LH Theriot-style hitter who might compete for the Fontenot-type LH reserve infielder role. Spears opened the season at age 22, so it's not like he's too old for his level. Obviously utility infielders are supposed to be good defensively (Fontenot notwithstanding), and utility players are normally expected to play more than one position (Fontenot notwithstanding.) Spears has played almost nothing but 2B. I wonder if he's just a bad fielder and as such is a long shot for any big-league service or contribution? Or is it possible that he's reaching the stage where Fleita will say, "Heh, Spears is doing pretty well, he's getting close enough to the majors where we need to start moving him around in preparation for big league utility jobs"?

badnews, some good points on the relievers. Few of the big-stuff fast-track college relievers have actually turned out all that well. So there is strong precedent for failure. Unless there is reason to expect that the odds of success with the reliever are way higher, and history doesn't indicate such, then it really doesn't make sense. In some ways, I think it's perhaps not so surprising. I think a lot of pitchers get put in relief because they don't have the consistency or the control to be innings-eating starters. The guy we drafted last year, for example, is having a great year, but the scouting suggests that his control isn't that hot. So it may be that if a premium college arm is pitching relief, maybe the very fact that his manager put him in relief rather than rotation might suggest that his control isn't really that hot. Or that the high-90's velocity he shows pitching only on weekends doesn't hold up when pitching starter innings, and might not hold up under the kind of heavy workload that pros like Marmol and Wood are experiencing. Still, those are scouting/probability reasons, and they are logical. But, I'm still somewhat of the view that BPA applies. If there is a stud prospect who happens to be a reliever, and everybody else is passing because relievers aren't as valuable as starters or players; or everybody else is passing because some teams have whiffed on dumb reliever picks in the past; if there is a reliever that is really talented and is justifiably scouted as much, much better than the alternatives, I wouldn't necessarily pass just because relievers don't matter as much and don't pitch 200 innings. If you pick one at 19 or 41 and he proves to be really good, I wouldn't look back as a wasted pick. But badnews, I agree that it's unlikely that any of the relievers this year are likely enough to become good to justify. Too many control questions. So I agree that the odds don't look to be very favorable of getting good value with a reliever at 19.

Thanks for the Kelly comments. Yeah, he doesn't sound very appealing. "Raw power", "somewhat raw", "production is still a projection", and "will need to improve his ability to make consistent contact", all sound like no-no-no-no-no's to me. As does " may outgrow the position, leading to a move to third base". And the following does not "safen" much to me: "With a fastball that sits in the low to mid-90s and one of the nation's best hammer curveballs, Kelly is a safe pick in that if he doesn't pan out in the field, he could be successful on the mound." As we've seen with other two-way guys (Ryan Harvey in particular), you choose one or the other. And if he's a raw hitter, Oneri is going to give him many years to struggle through the problems before bagging the idea. So even if he might be a top pitcher, Fleita wouldn't switch him there until he's 23 or so, by which time he's likely lost much development time and will be used only in relief. OK, so I'll mark him off as a "definitely avoid" guy.

DSL1 is 3-0, DSL2 is 1-2. Team one seems to have more older guys, a lot of guys in the 20-22 range. Not sure if there are any clues; if DSL1 the "good" team (even if mostly overaged roster fillers) and DSL2 the JV team for the young kids to get some action? If so, then does it mean that if a 17 or 18-year-old is on team 1 and is doing well, then those are the "real" pospects? While the older guys are roster fillers and the team 2 guys are "well, you never know when a guy might blossom, or add 7 mph to their fastball, or suddenly figure out the grip on a breaking ball..."

Thanks for the note that Ceda was a rain delay deal. That's a relief.

The bonus wasn't disclosed when he did sign and he wasn't a high profile signing, so it was likely a 5-figure bonus. I don't know, but he was sent directly to the states at a rather young age, and directly installed into the regular rotation. Few guys the age he was when signed go straight to the states, or get the regular innings he got. Point is, by his first summer they were obviously treating him like a prospect. So it wouldn't surprise me at all if he signed for 6 figures! Nice to see him with a strong debut. Any update on whether or not Ceda is hurt, getting pulled after 4 good innings? Sure hope he's OK.

Kelly's only signing as a SS. I've heard Cinci like him at their pick... Kelly is projected for Cubs in several of the mocks. And I know some posters like him quite a bit. What's the scouting report on him, and how many hear think he'd be a good selection? Seems what I read from draft things, they rarely talk about his baseball projections. Rather, in the brief synopsis, it's always "Son of Pat Kelly", "QB commit to Tennessee", "football option could make him pricey", "can pitch as well as play, although he wants to play SS, not pitch, in the pros". Those are all interesting news bits, but by the time they finish with that there's no space left to discuss much of his baseball attributes. He's a multi-athlete (QB, pitcher, SS); does that mean he's raw? Or as a baseball son, is he plenty polished? He's got a QB arm for SS; does he have the hands and quickness and when he's 26 will he have the flexibility to play SS? Does he project much power? Has he been a big hitter in HS, or like Harvey and Vitters is a he a guy who can't hit .400 in HS? Hacker who can't recognize breaking balls, but the hope is that his athleticism will someday enable that? Or is he a smart, disciplined, polished hitter already? I have no idea.

Samardz has gone 9K/1walk/5 hits/0.5 WHIP over his last two starts/12 innings. So the "not hot" is actually a bit behind. If he puts up another couple starts like that, maybe he'll show back on their "hot" sheet by the next time they post one!

Very informtative to see those scouting evaluations by Weaver. The bad, of course, is the "average arm" and "I wouldn't say he's going to be a power guy". Not many big-league SS's with average arms. So I'm already imagining him being a guy who might be switched to 2B; heh, maybe Brian Roberts prospect without the switch hitting? The good is that Weaver views him as a "premium prospect", "he's got some power", views him as an 80-runner, and "He's got a good swing and he's got good balance." Obviously good balance in the box is the key to hitting, and good hitting is also the key to power. A guy with average power who hits the ball on the nose produces more XBH than a Harvey or Dopirak with extraordinary power who rarely hit the ball solidly. The "80" on the running thing was a surprise, giving anybody an 80 is rare, so I assumed he'd be a 70 or less.