craig

I'm interested in all starters (except Keisler), today no exception. Will take some time, but figuring out whether we have anything in harben, Ashwood, Atkins, or Veal is interesting. Hope we get some good games from some of them. Question for cal or others: Wellington Castillo came into the season as one of our top prospects, and after having a stellar camp and getting 5 hits in the first two games, while many of the top-ten prospects have had depressing camps/early season results, Castillo had moved into my top-10. But after two games he's disappeared, and we're stuck with Mark Reed catching for Daytona. Do we know what happened to Castillo, how serious it was, and if/when he'll be back this season? Thanks in advance if anybody knows anything. Nice to see Maestri getting through 5 shutout innings, and starting to put the "can't-pitch-rotation, only relief" viewpoint to sleep.

MiLB box score says 3BB in 5 IP. :? It was 5 yesterday! I swear I'm not going crazy. Cal, I noticed that too. At first they listed the bad 6th inning outing by the bust we got for Pagan onto Maestri's line. His line looked a lot better after they removed that. Maestri has yet to get cruising comparable to what he was doing last year. His K/BB and WHIP were great last year, and that hasn't been the case in his two starts yet. at the same time, he hasn't confirmed the "ill-suited-for-rotation" view, either. Hopefully he'll continue to put up zero's in rotation, and will increasingly match that with the K/BB/WHIP magic that he had last year. I'm pretty interested about him. Really, other than some of our more gifted prospects (Veal, Ceda, Cabrera), the rotation pitching has been very effective thus far. Will be interesting to see how dudes like Berg, Russell, Maestri, Siegfried, Harben etc. hold up as their arms get more ware, as the weather warms up, and as the opposing hitters start to find their strokes. I'm not that concerned about the Peoria situation. One of the principles is that good prospects are supposed to be able to outperform bad prospects. That guys like Rundle and the guy we got for Barrett can't really hit with Lalli or Rosa, that just means that they have no future. If they did, in due time they'd be able to beat out those guys. May also reflect on Ryne, like many managers he probably likes to win. If these alleged prospects really aren't any good, it's natural to want to play guys who have a chance to get a hit now and then.

Samardz K'd a guy in the first inning. Then he mowed them down into the 6th. He then K'd the last out in the 6th and K'd the side in the 7th. So his last four outs were K's. 5th and 6th also had 3 flyouts, two line singles, and a walk. 4 popouts during the first four innings. I think the GO/AO ratios can sometimes be a bit misleading for Samardz, becauase when he's going good he gets a lot of popouts. He must have really been throwing strikes and getting some fast outs during his GB/pop-out innings. In only his second start his pitch count must be pretty low; to have gotten seen innings in under the early pitch counts is pretty extraordinary. Perhaps his pitch count isn't quite as restrictive, since he was in camp with the major leaguers and started earlier than the true minor-leaguers, maybe. But I thought that the pitch counts are usually on the order of 75 pitches or so at this point. Nice start for Sammy.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/blogentries/index.html?bbPostId=B5tV7ajsXBBqCzEqCdEVo1xgQCzBIjI11n6B2WCz9hnEArgZOsH&bbParentWidgetId=B7hKffsuorcGDKIZK9SoYtK Az Phil on the signing of Hams and on one of the final intrasquad games before XST Cactus League starts. Was singularly unimpressed with most of the 9 Latin pitchers he saw, the exceptions being "Yohan Gonzalez (big dude with a power arm) and Antigua (more of a "crafty" lefty with a plus-sinker and breaking ball and excellent control)". Interesting to get a scouting report on Antigua. I'm a bit disappointed that he sounds more like a finesse Lilly-type than a good stuff guy, but a sinker, breaking ball, balanace, and control can take you a long way if the fastball is at least semi-average. "Cubs 2007 #1 draft pick 3B Josh Vitters continues to look sluggish in all aspects of his game, although he had a decent final BP round (about ten swings) during pre-game BP. Then he proceded to bounce out weakly 6-3 and 4-3 and fly out to CF, before finally roping a line-drive RBI single. Then he grounded out weakly 6-3 again in his final AB. He also had a throwing error (he is wearing a pressure-sleeve on his right elbow). He appears to be pressing. " Sigh.

The notion that Rhee is the first guy to pitch at age 19 since maddux is wrong, obviously. I may not remember well, but Hernandez didn't make the team last spring. He went to XST, IIRC, and only got called up after one of the Dolis/Muldowney/Albuquerque/Ceda original starters got hurt. So while Hernandez was significantly younger age-wise, perhaps one could finesse that it's one thing to get called up by necessity and another to clearly earn a spot right off the bat. According to list birthdays, Z made the low-A rotation right out of camp at age 17, and didn't turn 18 until June of his Midwest year.

Nice to see an effective start by Cabrera. Peoria has gotten some strong rotation pitching. Although a lot of the good outings have been relatively low-K, Peoria and elsewhere (Cabrera, Siegfried, Russell, Samardz).

Nice find, cal. Hope Hams turns into somebody. Sounds like an interesting development prospect.

He did have TJS in '06, but he showed good velo in '07. Probably sits 89-90 can touch 93, doesn't have much of a slider or change at the time of the draft. I wouldn't consider him someone who slipped to the 20s based on that. Thanks, ping. If he could touch 93 last year, and had TJ in 06, then I'd imagine he might have the arm to be a prospect. If he ends up getting guys out, then I can figure that he has enough arm to keep an eye on, and that he must be coming up with some kind of breaking pitch. I did read that he was a walkon at LaSalle, and actually went there for football, or a football scholarship, or something. If indeed he was a football guy and not that big a baseball guy, and then had TJ as a sophomore, I'd guess he probably hasn't had scouts watching him for years. Would seem to have a chance to be a good scouting find and a diamond in the rough, perhaps? Nice start for Rhee thus far.

Sorry to interfere with today's stuff by talking about yesterday's, but often once the night is done nobody reads or discusses it anymore. 1. That was a very nice start by Caridad. The AZ Phil stuff and most of our rotation speculation had never really talked about him. He's 22, they said he has a good arm, said he has good life, some sink, and has three pitches. The Cubs paid some solid money to get him. I was actually surprised he started in high-A. Anyway, here's hoping he emerges as a genuine meaningful prospect. 2. Castillo started off with 3 hits, nice start. I know, it's just one game, and they were all singles. But when they discuss him, it's always with defense discussed. Would be cool is his offense progressed in the right direction. You could have a serious prospect in that case. 3. What if anything do we know about Muschko? I know he's RHP, he's already well along into age 22, and he pitched for LaSalle, and was drafted like round 22. Do we know anything to suggest that he's got more upside than your ordinary 22nd-round college pick? (Which normally isn't much). (For example, was he converted from catcher or infield, so hadn't actually pitched that much? Or had he had arm trouble as a sophomore, so people weren't sure where his arm was at, or anything?) Unlike most of the college pitchers, I notice that he pitched last year in rookie league, not Boise. That's often the case for guys who are viewed as raw, or who need more instruction, or who had been hurt and have more need for the Mesa facilities and medical stuff.

This will seem like a Cub apologist. But be that as it may, I think there is some reason to be optimistic and/or to justify some of the assignments. 1. Peoria's opening rotation is extremely young for their level. Rhee, Cabrera, Acosta, and Hernandez, that's four teenagers, probably at least three and perhaps four of which will be in the rotation. I'd be extremely surprised if any other Midwest-league team has three teenage starters in their opening rotation. I think all four of those guys have the potential to be good major-leaguers. 2. There are other elements to the game besides hitting, especially for catchers. Clevenger hit well last year, but he's caught 15 games in his pro career. Doing Daytona to develop his defense, that seems completely justifiable to me. (Although I do have a fear that by keeping the busted Mark Reed there, that Jody Davis will play the experience Mark Reed and instead put Clevenger and his bat in at 1B and DH a lot, so that he'll again be lacking in games behind the plate. Obviously Castillo will play a lot. So I expect Castillo to play every-other-day, with Reed/Clevenger splitting up the other half of the games. I really wish they'd just released Reed and made it a straight Castillo/Clevenger tandem.) 3. There are other elements to the game besides hitting, especially for catchers. This also applies to Donaldson. Based on bat, obviously they'd have skipped him to Daytona, as they did with Thomas, Wyatt, Wright, and Barney (as well as pitchers Russell and Lambert.) But with only two years of catching experience (and I think even his first year didn't he do some 3B/C split duties?), all accounts suggest that while Donaldson has the tools to be very good defensively, that he's still raw and needs some polish. So I'm not sure that isn't an appropriate and justifiable assignment.

He had four starts, well into the season. Who knows why he struggled. Total coincidence? (Every pitcher has some bad games, and sometimes they come in bunches.) He got tired after two innings? He understood that the purpose was so that he'd practice his 3rd and 4th pitches more, because he didn't throw them much in relief and they weren't any good? So he threw a bunch of them and indeed, they weren't any good? He had a sore back? His girlfriend was dumping him? His mechanics were mixed up? Lots of possible factors. Premature to conclude which ones were responsible, or might necessarily be problems in future rotation work.

Thanks for updates, Nate. Much appreciated. Having Cabrera in the rotation is very good news. HOpefully he's healthy and will impress. I was pretty disappointed at the notion that he wasn't interesting enough to justify rotation. Acosta remains a puzzle. Still, I imagine these things can be very, very fluid. Sometimes I think who gets selected as starter is more important in that it reveals who management takes seriously. But minor league spring training doesn't last very long, so the pitchers begin on very short pitch counts. I'd be surprised if any Peoria pitchers go more than 5 innings during the first two rotations, and those who aren't pretty sharp will likely often be out before then. So if Acosta, for example, is scheduled to piggy-back behind Cabrera for the first two cycles, he'll likely be able to get in 3-5 innings each time just like a starter would. Sandberg can reconsider who's going to start after that. cal, thanks for confirming that Ceda is in for Daytona. I hope Hempy is #5, because as a tall formerly fast lefty back from injury, I always have this vision of a guy emerging much faster and better than he ever was. But certainly a good chance that Marco Carillo will be the guy. Not a lot of upside, I don't think, but he's a decent A-ball pitcher.

Yeah, that helps clarify a lot, although why AlAl is in one day and out the next, and what's up with Huseby, is unclarified. I wonder whether AlAl is gone because he's hurt; because he got released or sent down again; or whether they decided to push him up to Daytona. (Maybe somebody there got hurt in the pen, or they decided to start him there after all, or who knows what.) I hope you're wrong about Chen as being obvious relief. He got paid 3rd-5th round money, IIRC, and scouted as a control pitcher. I'd be pleased if he threw enough strikes with enough movement, even if not 96 mph, to be a worthwhile rotation guy. I'm guessing his "missing" status relates to the Olympics. I recall reading that Chris Robinson has missed camp for the Canadian Olympics team, and was just returned for the season. I assume the same applies for Chen. I'm also not sure his usage last year was predictive of his future or intended role now, either. He had an arm problem, so when he did pitch, IIRC, he may have been on a cautious rehab status, not necessarily the role they hoped for when they signed him. I'd wondered why he was missing; I'd assumed Olympics, but I'd also wondered if it was health. Some of these Asian teams practice a lot, so it may be that he's gotten in plenty of work, more he'd have gotten in our regular camp. So he may be good to go. Obviously, though, popping him into relief as you say could clear up the rotation bundle. And it's also certainly true that his signing bonus may overvalue him. In Asia if you don't overpay somebody else will sign the guy, so it's not like I should expect equal value as what we'd sign in the non-free-market draft. And obviously he did have arm problems after being signed; so he might be 5 mph slower than he used to be. And obviously he didn't scout as a giant guy with mongo velocity potential in the first place, so he probably didn't have much he could afford to lose. I wonder if this is a developmental philosophy thing. A common plan has been to give innings to your best prospects, even if you assumed they'd end relief. It seems last year they didn't necessarily operate that way, and figured that it was fine to give a relief prospect 50+ 2 inning outings. I wonder if this reflects a change in philosophy/strategy? Or if it's just a matter of the specific prospects and the specific rosters and the specific alternatives.

cal, thanks for the roster info. Disappointments: 1. That Vitters wasn't so undeniably impressive that they couldn't keep him down. 2. Huseby. I'd had very high hopes for him. Either he's injured or he was unimproved this spring. Either way, that's bad bad bad. 3. cabrera in bullpen. I've gotten only limited scouting info on him. I know you've had him mid-90's and have thought he was serious, cal. That he's not in rotation tells me the Cubs aren't as high on him as I was. Probably my mistake, but disappointing nonetheless. Puzzled: 1. Acosta. He's one of the somewhat limited number of rotation prospects the organization has. That the peoria reporter had his role uncertain seemed weird. I'd think either he'd be a starter, no-doubt-about-it, or he'd be in XST, cut-and-dried. Interesting/Hopeful: 1. Wrigley and I are both delighted that Berg will take another crack at rotation. I'd thought they might have decided it was time to put him in relief. 2. The Daytona rotation is kind of intriguing; we don't have the official word, but it appears that 3 of their 5 are relief prospects being given rotation work. (Ceda, Maestri, and Papelbon.) That may speak to the depressing paucity of legit rotation prospects at that level. But for me it will be fun to see how they perform. (I actually have a faint hope that Maestri will surprise and excel, and may end up being reconsidered as a rotation prospect after all. Decent fastball, good slider, good control, throws strikes, those are some rotation-fitting qualities. Obviously he'll need to come up with something that works versus lefties. And who knows if his fastball is sustainably good given rotation innings. But I like rotation guys who throw strikes.) I'm enthused about Russell. Being an optimist, I'm also hoping that Hempy is in because he's throwing 90-95 now, a year further removed from arm issues. Rather than just because they didn't have anybody else suitable. Probably at 23-approaching 24 they just figured he'll either sink-or-swim; if he swims, nothing lost, but maybe you'll get really lucky and he'll step up. 3. Peoria rotation seems a puzzle (Acosta factor) and I wonder if that report will prove to be less than fully accurate. Huseby and Cabrera out are real disappointing. Rhee in is very encouraging. Acosta on the staff at all is rather encouraging, and I assume he'll be rotation when it plays out. Albuquerque, we'll see; he threw hard and with some K's on occassion last year, other times not. He could quickly go either way. Ashwood is interesting, who knows what he's got or how good he might be. Very intriguing is the claim that Siegfried is in there. I'd assumed Siegfried rotation was mostly talk and he'd be relief when it came down to it. He's probably rotation (if in fact he really is)_ the way that Ceda is; just for innings. But he was very good on good days, and his ground-ball extreme profile (on good days when he had a clue of control) was very interesting. As usual, at that level none of the guys are set. Anybody who actually performed really well, I'd be all fired up right away. The question is whether any of them really does have what it takes to perform really well. Heh, hopefully 6 or 7 of them! 3. Peoria rotation

ttp://cubs.scout.com/a.z?s=260&p=2&c=741689&ssf=1&RequestedURL=http%3a%2f%2fcubs.scout.com%2f2%2f741689.html I can't read it and don't subscribe, but the title and the opening paragraph tell the basics: Pawelek got cut again, and can go back to Mesa again. So Ashwood, Hernandez, Huseby, and Rhee would seem to be locked. Pawelek, Acosta, Hatley, and Redmond are out. Cabrera, Sasser, Albuquerque, and possibly outside shot for Siegfried are in the mix. Probably Siegfried-for-rotation was one of those winter discussions, but as usual when it came down to cases, that may not have stayed serious for long. Of those three/four, I'd guess Sasser is the one boring one. I certainly hope that one of the promising talented guys shows enough control to get that spot, rather than going with the veteran roster-filler Sasser.

Thanks for that thoughtful list. I think that's pretty fair. Of the guys ahead of Watson, Harben and Shaver obviously have rehab issues, not ready. Berg is a big-league prospect with a big-league arm. I hope he's still doing rotation. As a fan I prefer prospects dominating the innings, knowing which days I really want to check the box scores, and getting the more detailed scouting reports that attenders write about starters. But if for whatever reason the Cubs decide that it's better for Berg the prospect to get in a year of relief experience, I defer to their judgment on that. With you, I personally hope he starts, even though his big-league future, if any, is more likely in relief. The other three, Estrada, Reinhard, and Watson, are roster-fillers, not prospects. I don't think any have any meaningful likelihood of making the majors in rotation certainly, or in relief either (except for maybe Watson; always a shot to get a shot as a token lefty). It's probably discouraging that they don't have anybody more promising than Watson to fill that spot. As you say, hopefully by June somebody better will turn up. Papelbon or Maestri might do very well in Daytona. Or Harben or Shaver might be built up enough to handle that role.

I read that also, but thought they were possibly temporarily starting him in the hopes of seeing what he has as quickly as possible in order to decide whether to cut him or keep him for the bullpen. I can't imagine him starting over several of the other candidates during the regular season. I hope I'm right! Wrigley, who did you have in mind for the several other candidates for AA? Harben's arm may not be much (the observation was that he didn't look like he had much of anything earlier in camp). They may want to develop Berg as a reliever, under the assumption he may reach the majors as a reliever but just doesn't have the package to start. They may decide they'd rather develop their relievers in Daytona's rotation (Papelbon, Maestri) than in WTenn's. So who's left? Looks to me like roster fillers in spots 4,5 at AA; roster fillers for most of Iowa rotation; relievers or ??? for most of Daytona's rotation. We just don't have that much volume of pitchers for rotation, since so many of our interesting pitchers are really relievers, not starters. I suppose you could throw Santo or Reinhold or one of those roster-filler types in there.

cal, I'm also interested in Siegfried. There's really a lot of guys who, if they were selected for rotation, I'd immediately be interested and intrigued. Wouldn't that in itself suggest the org saw some potential, and maybe they've progressed or impressed or gotten faster or something? And a lot who, if they got selected for rotation and then pitched a copule of good games, I'd be enthused about. Lefties Hempy and Siegfried are both in that group, especially if they were selected and showed success at Daytona. If Caridad showed up in Daytona's rotation, and had some zippy box scores, we'd get prettyinterested pretty fast in him, too, I suspect. I was surprised that Phil still had Redmond and Hatley in Peoria's bunch. Probably the list with Peoria means very little. If you look at the Peoria vs Boise bunches, Kevin Kreier may be the only American-born guy without injury limitation in the boise list. So maybe the Boise pitchers just work together and have instructions in Spanish rather than English, and the guys with any talent and any experience who are American-born just stay with the Peoria group until cuts are made? Hatley, Redmond, Acosta, maybe they all get the cut then. If Cabrera were to make it, that would be pretty cool. If nothing else, that would suggest that they think his arm is sound. When he had arm trouble last year, I always figure there's at least a shot that a guy's career is shot or extremely delayed. If he's healthy, that's a big deal IMO. Really if any of Acosta, Cabrera, hatley, Rhee, or Redmond was to show up in Peoria's rotation, I'd be pretty interested. Any of those seems to have some arm strength such that they might justify as prospects if they can throw strikes. Those guys would be a lot more intriguing to me than wildman Pawelek or an experienced short lefty like Sasser.

Cal, much thanks for the links, both the Knoxville report and AZ Phil's stuff. The Knoxville story obviously wasn't too up-to-date, because almost half of the guys discussed had already been sent to Daytona according to Phil's stuff. Much of the Knoxville info still seemed based on Fleita-gush back during the winter, in which he discussed a bunch of guys skipping up to AA. While it's possible the fact that they aren't (Ceda, Lansford, castillo, Maestri, Lambert....) because they've had disappointing camps, I think more likely it's just that Fleita guys is just always over-the-top hyperbole. Between the Knoxville article and Phil's stuff, there have been several things of interest, apart from the actual player assignments as they currently stand. 1. On Castillo: "He has by far the best arm we have from the big leagues down through the system," Bailey, a former minor league catcher, said. "In the game last week, he threw from his knees and the ball from his hand to second base never dropped more than two inches. The guy running was out by eight to 10 steps. "He has Pudge Rodriguez potential. His release time to second base is off the charts." That's coming from an ex-catcher, so hopefully those comments have some substance beyond typical hype. 2. Bailey on Caridad, "He has a great arm and a live fastball." 3. Not sure if Bailey said as much, or if the reporter was just assuming. But for AA, he had Samardz, Veal, Berg, and Atkins locked in as the first four starters, with no clue for #5. Maybe that's just false reasoning. But during the winter Fleita had talked about Berg to bullpen. I like the idea of Berg remaining in rotation and getting more work, he's still pretty young and his upside is pretty high. I still have an imagination that he might have the potential to kind of do a Kevin Hart-like emergence this year. 4. That colvin is still or again injured, bad elbow. Bailey suggested he might start to play the field this week, but we'll see. Cal or others, do you know Colvin's injury history? Is this elbow the same deal that knocked him out of the world games (or whatever they were actually called) this winter, and had him relatively inactive in camp? Or is this something different? At draft Colvin's arm wasn't buzzed a lot; but last summer the Cubs said it was really good. It would be unfortunate if Colvin would have lasting throwing problems, so that instead of a CF/RF candidate we'd be looking at another guy whose arm would end up in the class of Juan Pierre, Jacque Jones, and Matt Murton, such that he'd be limited to left field. 5. Az Phi had a number of interesting comments following his article, in response to questions. Included was discussion about Daytona and Peoria rotations. Not sure how much is "inside scoop" versus the same kind of educated guessing that you or I might make. But he said that Daytona has 3 sure rotation guys to start: Russell (obvious now, although during winter I'd expected but not been sure that he'd skip; nice to read Phil claiming he's been looking really good), Papelbon, and Maestri. I don't think anybody has suggested that Papelbon is viewed as a long-term rotation guy; this would appear to be strictly for developmental reasons, more innings. Maestri, though, is news. I'm very interested in him, since he's shown some perfect elements: allegedly fast fastball (although that may be Fleita-gush exaggeration), excellent slider (arguably the best in the system), excellent control, and outstanding K/W/WHIP. Would be interesting to see him translate the success he had in relief last year to rotation. Probably it's again a reliever getting innings for development reasons; force him to work on his offspeed, and force him to work on the change or cutter or something so that he has something to use against lefties. (My understanding is that he had a lot more trouble versus lefties, and as a reliever he'll see a lot of those if he makes the majors.) There has been other talk that Ceda was also going to be given rotation innings for development reasons, so it's conceivable that Daytona could show a rotation in which 3 of it's starters are really relief prospects in Ceda, Papelbon, and Maestri. Phil suggested that Arik Hempy might be a lead candidate for a rotatation spot there, too. That's kind of interesting. After his surgery, he didn't throw very hard, or all that well, last year, and was obviously a late draft pick. But I thought there was some speculation that he was a big guy who had thrown pretty hard pre-injury. If a year later he's got more velocity back, maybe he's got a shot to emerge into a legit prospect? Phil suggested that Muldowney and Blackford aren't in the rotation mix at present because of their injury rehab status, but that perhaps later on they might move in. I admit I don't really understand the Blackford stuff; he's always seemed really sub-average to me. If other guys need to get out of the way to make a spot for him, either he has more talent than his performance or anything I've read before has ever suggested. Or else he's just nothing much, and it might reflect how limited are the other guys currently in the mix who might get displaced by him if/when he's 100%. 6. For Peoria, Phil speculated that the three rotation locks were Hernandez, Huseby, and Zach Ashwood. Ashwood is somewhat interesting; 6'4" lefty, had some projection left when drafted, and by some accounts threw in the low 90's pre-draft. Pitched pretty well for Boise, and I think his composite numbers mask that he struggled some early but then was quite good down the stretch. (In his last two starts, he had 14K to 1 walk). Would be interesting if he's got some potential. Phil suggested that "the 4th and 5th will probably be either Alburquerque, R. Acosta, Cabrera, Pawelek, or Rhee. If R. Acosta, Cabrera, or Rhee don't make the Peoria rotation, then they would probably go to EXST and start there, moving to Boise (as rotation starters) in June, with a promotion to Peoria possible at any time." I wonder if hatley might also be in that mix; otherwise why would he even be with the Peoria group? Seems premature to just have him in relief this early in his development. If Boise ends up with Acosta, Rhee, Cabrera, and Hatley, plus maybe Redmond or Antigua or a draftee, they could have a pretty jazzy rotation.

Ceda's weight and size has been much mentioned. A recurring question has been whether he has a weight problem, which could harm his career. (Weight problems tend to increase, not decrease, after age 21!) What was your impression? Is he huge.... as in having a huge frame, a dominant build, and is reasonably fit? Is his weight appropriate for his frame? In other words, "huge" as in very desirably huge? Or is he "huge" as in huger than he should be, as in fat, as in undesirably huge?

Pie was never platooned in the minors, though. Nor do I think he was platooned early in his winter-league stints. So if his farm and winter stints so large and somewhat consistent splits, it may be harder to blame them on sample size or opportunity. I don't know how Pie's career will play out. He got a couple of hits versus LHP the other day, and my impression was that while he was bad versus LHP this winter league, he was actually even worse versus RHP. So maybe he's going to be fine or no worse versus lefties than versus righties. I don't know. But there are numerous LH hitters who don't hit LHP well, even when afforded extended opportunities. It's hardly "old school" ignorance to recognize that not-uncommon reality. Will Pie be one of them? I don't know. But it's certainly possible. And even if we knew right now that Pie was going to spend his career as an .850-OPS guy versus RHP but a .680-guy versus LHP, a guy who should rightfully play his career in a platoon if used right, I don't think that being "only" a platoon guy should mean we should trade him right now. A good lefty platoon player is very valuable.

No, that's not the only thing that let it not go on for long. They didn't like doing it. As raw and Colt have shown, the Cubs did go through a significant hunk of last year with only one IF sub. I fully agree with you; they didn't like doing it. But they did do it. I suspect going with Cedeno as the only infielder might be less problematic this year than going with Fontenot as the only guy last year. Cedeno might be somewhat less repulsive, since he's a talented defender (even if sometimes dumb and error-prone.) They may be in a position where they do something they don't like. Probably a choice between lesser evils. a) Cedeno as only infield sub. b) Sending Murton to the minors, again. c) Trading Murton for whatever double- or single-A prospect they can get for him. Maybe they can deal Murton for some prospect they really like, and they'll like it a lot. But unless they love the value they can get for murton in trade, I expect they'll need to either settle for having just Cedeno as infielder, for a disappointing Murton trade, or for Murton in minors (which I don't think they'll feel all that good about either.) Which of those is the lesser of the three evils?

I don't see how that is possible. The only way that happens is if they go with 1 backup middle infielder, and I don't see anyway they pull that off. .... With the normal 5-man bench, if one is a catcher and you burn one on a 1B-man (Ward), that leaves you 3 guys to cover infield and outfield. Either it's one outfielder (Johnson covering all three spots, supplemented by Ward or Cedeno), and two infielders (Cedeno and Cintron). Or it's one infielder (Cedeno) and two outfielders (Murton and Johnson). Personally I don't see why going with Cedeno only wouldn't be just fine.

Those are challenges for anybody. But usually guys are differentiated as premium CFers or iffy based on their speed and range (and arm), not based on their ability to deal with the bricks. Since Johnson profiles as a gritty gung-ho guy, he maybe doesn't have the fear of bricks that somebody like Soriano has, for example. (Maybe he'll be injured after two games, but that's a different story.) Back when we had no CFer and Roosevelt Brown even was discussed, I recall Andy MacP saying that Wrigley has such a small OF, it's less of a problem to have a somewhat slow CFer there than if you're playing in Coors or big-CF parks. So it may be that the inferior speed/range a dude can have relative to the great ones is less of a liability in Wrigley than elsewhere.

Prospectus is just a formula. As truffle just mentioned, age and last year factor in, so both contribute to a projection that he'll do less than his career average. I'm not sure what time Johnson spent on the DL, if any. Doesn't the prospectus formula have some DL factor included, which is also a depresser? Point being, prospectus doesn't spent years and years studying Reed Johnson. It comes up with a formula based on a lot of past guys. But a few scouts can spend some focused time on Johnson. Is he healthy, or not? If he was hurt last year and is healthy now, that could explain why they'd be OK that he stunk last year and expect that he'll be better this year. Prospectus formula can't do that. On Davannon, I don't imagine that he's close to Johnson defensively in CF. Johnson is not that hot I don't think, but I beliee Davannon is considerably worse. Also, for subs, I think fielding percentage in a sense does factor in. If a guy knows what he's doing, but is short a little bit on range, that's more acceptable than if he's a butcher on par with Jake Fox at catcher. It's possible that while Johnson might not be Pie-caliber, that he wouldn't be a big problem to put him out there, especially in Wrigley which has limited space. But Davannon might be so poor that Lou just wouldn't ever use him out there.