craig

Thanks for info, peoria. By the way, I don't recall Sean in the box-scores this week. Did he get his work in via some other forum, or what? Cuevas-Novas was a very tall Dominican drafted out of a JC or something in the mid-30's rounds. Supposedly threw pretty hard, and BA liked his stuff. But he's not that young, probably 22 or 23?

No. An organization like the cubs has like 30 scouts. Spring training is an ideal time for scouting, because you can get to see a lot of players. You see more practice than during season game, in addition to the exhibition games. In exhibition games you get to see more pitchers than you would during a regular season game. And by this point, the minor league camp is rolling, so you can spend hours scouting prospects. Often I think the practice stuff (including minor league camp) is done in the morning, well before the exhibition games. So you can scout prospects and practices all morning and still get an exhibition game in the afternoon. If you've got 30 scouts, you can have a scout in every camp all spring. That the Cubs have scout(s) in Oriole camp and vice versa doesn't prove much. I don't know that the cubs are spending multiple scouts to watch Roberts play. He's pretty much a known commodity. For Baltimore to send scouts to watch our prospects, that's different, since they are talking volume, and those prospects aren't well established. It's not like Cubs are trying to decide if they want Roberts or Millar. But the Orioles might be wanting to decide if they want Cedeno or Patterson, or whatever. I wonder if the Cubs don't have people in Orioles camp to scout other guys than Roberts. Maybe they want more than we're willing to give for Roberts. Maybe we won't offer what they want for Roberts. So, no deal straight. But maybe if we scout their system and find some prospects that we like, we give them the prospects they like and want from us, we get Roberts, but they level the deal by adding some A-ball prospect that we like or something.

Fox has a strong enough arm to play 3rd. I think it's questionable whether he'd ever approach mediocre/average defensively even if he spent years playing nothing but 3rd. But if he wanted to go to extended spring training and work with the 3B guys to try to learn the position, I think that would be an interesting experiment.

Pedroia had a 1.000+ OPS last May, after 55 poor April AB, although even in April he still had an OBP over .300. And Pedroia was sitting almost half the games prior to his May breakout. So it's not like they stuck with him aas an every-day starter for as many AB's. His playing time seemed to already be on the bubble, but then he started to produce. If pie can keep his OBP over .300 this April, and then OPS over 1.000 in May, I don't think he'll need to worry about his playing time at all. Pie and Pedroia are hardly unique in starting poorly. But sooner or later you need to produce. If Pie produces, nobody will worry about any of this. It's only if he's sub-.300 OBP for week after week, month after month, that it will become a problem. If that's true through April, fine, stick with it. If it still that way as June is rolling in, I absolutely do not expect that. But if it is, then we've got some problems and tough decisions.

Yea, that's a bunch of b.s. A handful of sporadic ABs punctuated by weeks of sitting on the bench between them. He got 177 AB's total. shttp://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/gamelog?statsId=7704&year=2007 Those were split over mostly two windows. If you look at the game log, he got called up and started at least 10 of his first 12 games in April (4 or more AB), and only once in those first 12 games didn't play. With a .250 OBP he got benched, and returned to Iowa. He got recalled again in June, and started almost every one of his first 20 20 games, routinely getting 4 or 5 AB. (The record shows two games with 2 AB and two games with 3 AB.) 79 AB in 20 games, that's full time opportunity. After a while, having gone hitless in five of his last 8 games, and with a .275 OBP and a .227 average, he lost his full-time job. Some sporadic bench play, back to Iowa. When he got recalled in August, he was again given a shot as the regular starter but this time a much shorter window, 4 straight starts. AFter going hitless in two of the last three, Lou bagged the idea it was sporadic defensive replacement usage with only a couple of starts the rest of the way. Basically 10 start, 20 start, an 4 start windows in April, June, and August. Each in concentrated packages, and each following full-time work at Iowa. So it's not like his opportunities involved using him when he was cold off the bench, other than the few scattered AB's during the last 6 weeks. The June window was really the best opportunity. If he'd have done well in April, that would have been great. But by June, they'd abandoned the Soriano-in-center experiment, it was Pie's to take and hold. Are 10 and 20 start windows too short? To adequately judge a guy long-term, obviously not. But that's long enough where a guy who's hitting at Iowa could keep hitting and go from there. I understand that a 20-start window is short; pressured; and even the best of hitters go through 20-game periods where they struggle. I expect it will be longer this spring. But I don't know how many outfielders are allowed to go as the regular starter with OBP in the .275-range. I think Pie will make it a lot easier on everybody if he can keep his OBP on the right side of .300 early on. Then he won't need to worry about how quickly Lou will pull the plug.

I have no problem with the Cub handling of Pie thus far. He had a good opportunity to win the job last year but didn't. 1. Contrary to the complaint that he's not being given a chance or being written off prematurely, he got his 177 AB (quite a few for a rookie, actually), and doesn't seem to have lost any status in the organization. 2. They didn't give up on him. Instead they traded away the only competition on the roster (Jones), and have basically given Pie the job this spring. If the only "competition" being little sammy Fuld is too scary, then Pie's got a problem! 3. They have probably had chances to trade pie, but by accounts they seem to have highly valued him and protected him and marked him as off-limits, at least for normal players. (Might have been different if Twins were offering Santana....) 4. They could have pursued one of the FA CFers this winter: Torii Hunter, Andruw Jones, Rowand. But other than limited interest in Rowand for RF, they completely passed on the CF pool. Because they were committed to giving Pie an opportunity. 5. By Hendry's own account early in offseason, he wanted a RH-hitting CFer for reserve. There has been no suggestion that he looked for a LH starting CFer. Only for a RH bench/possible-platoon CFer. What's wrong with that? Pie has consistently been a very weak hitter vs LHP in the minors. What would be so horrible about letting him have the 500 AB versus RHP where he's most likely to succeed, and possibly protect him a bit vs LHP until/unless he's performing well against them? Seems to me that they have done everything possible to set things up to give Pie the position. He fumbled it last season after they gave it to him. But now they've given it back to him anyway. It hardly seems that they have been hard on him. 6. Some are complaining that they should just "let him alone". I'm no expert. I know it's the board premise that anything done by Cub management is wrong, destructive, or idiotic. Not to be heretic or get banned from the board, but I think it's at least theoretically possible that some coaching might help him. Shorten the swing some? Use the other field some? Take more pitches? Those inputs by Lou make good sense to me; do they sound so horrible? A smart poster on other board said that Pie's swing looks more compact this spring; if that a terrible thing if Lou made suggestions to that effect? I don't see why that would be so bad.

Hoffpauir has played some LF/RF, and observers have said he looks reasonably comfortable out there. I suspect that defensively he's preferable in the corners to Ward. Perhaps also preferable to Murton, for RF at least. Hoffpauir had a good year in 2004 AA. But he really struggled in 05 at AAA, and kind of lost his chance. Since then he's improved each year. (One of the reasons that a guy is "old" or "dinosaur" at 28 is that the assumption is a guy doesn't improve much beyond 25. But in Micah's case, he has.) His value, if any, is as a utility 1B/corner OF guy. He's obviously not going to be an intended starter. He doesn't have any meaningful trade value, other than what he might inspire during this spring training. He has not been protected on the 40-man roster, so anybody else could have picked him up, via Rule 5 or 6-year free agency. That he's still with us reflects his market value. But, that doesn't mean he might not end up being a competent, producing bench player. someday. That someday will depend on some opportunity. For now, that would require injury to Lee or Ward, or perhaps one of the corner outfielders. Given Ward's health history, it's not beyond possible that he would go DL at some point.

Followup post: "By the way, I was told that even though he has made great strides since last year, he is extremely raw. "At this point, he just doesn't know how to pitch". When I asked what this meant, he said that he is still pitching to the strike zone rather than to a specific spot."

My friend on a different board is friends with a Baltimore scout who scouts the Cubs and has for years. He's spent extensive time at the cub camp each of the past several springs, so the fact that he's been at the Cub camp for over a week and has some more days left is nothing special and doesn't prove anything regarding Roberts trade. But my friend passed on the following comment re Samardz: "I have been told that Samardzija has hit 99 several times this spring. His fastball has a late break downwards that should bring him a lot of groundballs, but the break probably isn't sharp enough to gather a lot of strikeouts. .... Look for him to work mostly on improving his slider this year." Nothing new or surprising here, I know. The report on hitting some 99's is encouraging. There was talk about upper 90's late in junior year, even though that hadn't been normal earlier in college. Last spring there was upper-90's velocity (including on TV broadcast). But once the minor league season rolled, it was only low-90's. So I have wondered a bit whether the big velocity was something of a myth, or whether he'd already worn down his arm and we'd never see serious speed again, or what. But if he's again hitting 99's, that would suggest his arm is uncompromised and he still does have plus-plus velocity. meph has comped Marquis, with merit; but if Marquis ever did approach 99, it was long before his Cub days. So in that scouting regard Samardz may be at a different level. The comment about the fastball movement has good explanatory power for the puzzle with Samardz. The puzzle to me has always been: why do some scouts like him so much, when he doesn't have any K-stuff that makes anybody miss bats? That his late-sinking fastball is good enough to impress scouts but not good enough to miss bats really seems to explain that puzzle nicely. (That, and touching 99). We'll see how things go with the slider and the change this year. I can understand why scouts would be pretty keen on a guy who can touch 99 and has good sinking break on his fastball. But for most big-league pitchers, most K's come on breaking stuff, or high fastballs, not on low fastballs. If his slider and change get better (or he really does incorporate a splitter that works), at least some K's should follow. But if he never gets any K's, that will probably reflect that his slider/change aren't progressing much. The fast sinking GB fastball remains the key piece. And still gives some basis for the hope that he'll become a GB factory who can justify low K's with low HR's. Last year he did give up his share of HR's. Will be interesting to see how that goes this year, too. Where do the HR's come from, and will they always? If he always gives up HR's and never gets K's, the future is blah. Are the HR's the result of hanging sliders and no-deception changeups? If both of those pitches get better, will the HR's sink to an excellent asset, while the K's improve somewhat towards mediocre? Are the HR's the result of fastballs that don't locate; when he gets them up the movement vanishes and it's fast batting practice? Don't know. For some guys, HR's always stick with them, it's a function of their stuff. Others, it's really a matter of their command, and if/when the command gets better, the HR's can drop off sharply. Hopefully Samardz is in that latter class.

Great to see Wuertz ready to make an appearance, and to have a good one. He's been an integral part of the bullpen. Hopefully his arm will be in shape and he'll be able to do his thing this year.

He's mostly played 1B in his career, and is viewed as a *very* good defensive 1B. But he has played some OF and my understanding is that while inexperienced, that he looks pretty natural out there. Not sure about his RF arm. But I think he could sell as a 1B/corner OF utility guy.

Seems to me that Andy and Hendry have denied that things are "heating up" or stuff like that. That doesn't mean that status-quo doesn't exist, and that status-quo will lead to a deal in due time. 1. Andy commented some time back about having waited, why not spend some time scouting spring training to see if anybody has changed and to get further scouting info? That makes sense to me. Why not wait to see who's healthy, if anybody shows signs of improvement, etc.. I don't believe a guy like Veal was even a non-roster invite, so if they want to look at cats like Veal or Huseby or guys like that, they may need to wait even longer. Not sure how look the minor leaguers have actually been in camp or throwing. 2. I don't know the date, but at some time during March teams can park injured guys onto the 60-day DL. That day has not yet arrived, and will not for a while I don't think. Orioles have a full 40-man roster, and if they add roster guys that will bump some off. But if they wait until the 60-day DL is usable, they might be able to avoid 40-man problems by parking some of their guys (like the pitcher they got for Tejada) onto the 60-day DL. For all we know, hendry has provided a pool of candidates. And Andy has said, "We aren't ready to make a deal with that pool right now. We'd like X, Y, and Z added to the pool. Call me back if you want to sweeten the pool. Or I'll call you back if I decide to say yes given the pool you've offered. In the meantime, we'll look around, maybe scout some of your guys. If we do end up deciding to go for it, it won't be until we've looked everybody over this spring to make sure they're healthy and to reconsider our scouting evaluations. And if we do end up deciding to go for it, it probably won't be until the 60-day DL thing opens up some 40-man spots. Anyway, I'll call you back if I decide we want to go for it; you call me back if you want to improve the pool. Until one of us is ready to move one way or the other, no need to talk."

They can also make it work by having Orioles pick up some/much of the salary.

Why is that?

On Soto: he had a lucky year. He figured things out. (But not to the degree that he'll sustain that kind of production again). And no, I don't think it's the result of PEDs. I'm not sure of any of the steroid or HGH reports have highlighted guys getting much smaller rather than bigger, which is what happened to Soto. I don't expect him to hit to the 07 level this year, or perhaps ever again. But his numbers at both Iowa and with Cubs were so spectacular, he's got a lot of room to slump and still be pretty good, for a catcher.

Thanks for BA list. Nice to see 5 Cubs in the top-82. Thanks also for that link to the old discussion. I was fairly decent, Gallagher likely but not certain. Colvin likely, perhaps as high as 75. Soto for sure. I didn't comment on Vitters; it's interesting that he's so high. Heh, the funny parts from that discussion were the biggest mistakes, by badnews (who scoffed at the idea of Colvin making it and ranted about how dumb we Cub fans were to overrate our prospects so much, Colvin should be about a #9 prospect on most lists...) and meph "Eric Patterson will most certainly be top 100 on BA. Don't be surprised if hes down around 50." O well, which of us don't make mistakes. Still, kind of funny. I even thought Samardz might still have a shot to sneak in somewhere in the 90's (I didn't think it likely, but it wouldn't have stunned me.)

Stats-wise, Roberts was 10th in OPS, 5th in OBP. http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/main/index.php?view=winshares&linesToDisplay=50&season_filter[0]=2007&league_filter[0]=All&pos_filter[0]=2B&Submit=Submit&orderBy=wsp&direction=DESC&page=1 In Hardball times win-shares, which attempts to include baserunning, defense, as well as the simple offensive stats, had Roberts as 2nd behind Utley in total win shares (which is a volume stat) and in win-shares-above-bench. In WSP, win-shares-percentage, Roberts scores 3rd behind Utley and Polanco for guys who played 2B regularly. I know the WinShares stuff was a Bill James thing. He's both a smart guy and has been doing saber stuff for a while now, so I assume it's not grossly flawed. But I'm not sure how it compares strengths/weaknesses-wise relative to Pecota or other metrics. Maybe it's got some flaws in it that overvalue Roberts? And obviously those numbers were for Roberts 2007, not Roberts future. Guys who scored below him last year may well outscore him next year or down the road, I understand that. Serious question: what's the spin on the relative merits/demerits of win-shares versus the WARPs, and what's a quick explanation of what WARP-2 and WARP-3 do that WARP-1 overlooks? Also: Prospectus gives Pecota cards and WARP values that are free; is there free source with WARP-2 and WARP-3? I'm sure the WARP-stuff has been discussed a dozen times, but I don't know where. Also, other than Win-Shares and WARP, what other metrics are there that include both defense and baserunning? (Unlike EqA and VORP, for example).

I like the idea of stealing 3rd. It's not something you do all the time. The volume of attempted 3B steals is limited. But I think Lou is right, there are times when it's easy. It's not a matter of forcing it; but when the defense is giving it to you (either by positioning of the 2B/SS and/or by total disregard by the pitcher), it makes sense to have the brains to recognize that and to capitalize. Getting to 3B with one out (or less), you can score on a groundball or a fly or a hit. And while 2B is "scoring position", I wonder what fraction of singles guys actually do score from 2B? I'm not sure it's as high as you think. Obviously you better have a very high success rate, much more so than stealing 2nd. But I think that's possible if you've got the brains to read the defense and to read the pitcher.

I know this is contrary to your premise. But there may be improvements needed in July that you don't know are necessary now. And there may be things we think our problems now that work out OK or even pretty good. We don't need 3B help now, or CF help now. But by July, if Pie and Fuld bust, or if Aram breaks his ankle, we might. And if Cedeno wins SS and is hitting .280 with a .750 OPS, maybe that won't end up being a hole after all, and we'll be glad we didn't sell the farm for somebody who's no better. There are so many questions now, it's hard to know what the needs will be. Will it be mostly 3B? CF? SS? Backup catcher? LH relief? Rotation? I know it's board policy that SS is the beyond-doubt black hole. The other thing that's hard to anticipate now is how trade values might change. If Veal is still a walkaholic wildman with an ERA around 5, and if Gallagher doesn't sustain any increase in velocity and is struggling along with a 4.35 ERA, their value might be considerably lower than today. Or, if Veal is rolling with a 2.65 ERA and 110K/40walks in 95 innings, and Gallagher is consistently working in the 92-96 with a more consistent breaking ball and a 2.15 ERA, their trade value might be through the roof.

"(Vitters) strike-zone recogntion is uncanny" February Vineline Vineline obviously is a positive mag, and the authors get their views after soliciting comments from all of the Cub farm coaches. So I understand if your view is that if somebody in Cub management said it so it must be ludicrous and absolutely wrong because all Cub management are idiots. Or that since nobody in Cub management has a clue about pitch recognition, if a Cub source says anything about zone recognition, how would they know? But I can assure you not even Vineline ever approached saying something like this about Harvey or Corey or Pie. And IIRC, there really hasn't been a lot written about Vitters strike-zone recognition. For me, I recall only one or two scouting reports that had comments raising the hackaway red flag. This adds an additional relevant scouting comment.

I'm going to hazard a guess and say that he'd probably hit the same amount of HR's in the 8 spot as he would anywhere else. Of course we'll never know, because he won't be able to be batting 2nd and 8th at the same time. But while I think "protection" isn't a meaningful reality earlier in the order, I think the anti-protection batting 8th has substance. It seems that when a pitcher knows an auto-out like Rich Hill or Ted Lilly is coming up next, they are even less likely to challenge a #8 hitter with mashable pitches. I would guess it might be a little harder to hit HR's batting 8th than batting 3rd. In their minor-league careers, the OPS advantage that Pie has and the trace career average advantage that he has is explained entirely by his HR's. If you removed both Fuld's and Pie's HR ab's from their stats, Fuld would have a much better batting average, a better slugging percentage, and an even larger OBP superiority. On AB's that don't result in HR's, Fuld has a better minor league career stats across the board. But Pie has hit HR's, which have gotten his OBP in the ballpark, have added hits to his batting average, and have added lots of bases to his slugging percentage. If Pie hits enough HR's (a dozen or more?), he's not going to lose his spot to Fuld. But if his HR's don't significantly boost his BA/OBP/slugging, maybe he will. It's not that rare for rookies to underperform HR-wise relative to in the minors. Hopefully Pie will be whacking some out. Of course, it's also possible that if he isn't swinging for them, he'll whiff less, walk more, and get more hits in play. Should be fun to watch.

Was interesting in Lou's radio interview today that he spent more time talking about fuld than Pie. But in the interview he also talked about Fukudome batting 3rd, and in that context I believe he made some comments about the #8 hitter, to the effect that the #8 hitter needs to have some OBP skill so that you aren't routinely opening innings with the auto-out pitcher. So Pie is in a pickle. he's not shown he's good enough to merit a spot higher in the lineup. But his crummy plate discipline makes him somewhat problematic for batting 8th. Pie's primary offensive advantage has been his HR power. Not sure how many HR's he'd hit batting 8th. Fuld's is that he's a disciplined hitter with OBP. So it may be that fuld is actually more what Lou might be looking for back there. Of course, if Pie could get some hits, could show some pitch selection, and could give some power besides hitting 8th, that would be awesome. My guess is that if Pie can sustain a decent OBP, it's a non-issue. But if his OBP is painful, that Lou may prefer Fuld with a more respectable OBP over Pie even if Pie has a little more power and OPS. For example, I'd guess Lou might prefer Fuld with a .325 OBP and a .670 OPS over Pie with a .295 OBP but a .700 OPS.

A note on Cintron: he's a switch hitter, and his splits are favorable: he's a career .347 OBP guy left-handed, with a career .305 batting average and .768 OPS hitting lefty. Theriot is a career .384 OBP vs lefties with an .846 OPS. I know Cintron isn't too hot defensively, worse than Theriot I assume. And I know neither would be likely to perform at those levels if you put them in a straight platoon. But if you did platoon a .347 OBP with a .384 OBP; might one reasonably get a .340+ OBP outcome? And if you platooned a .768 OPS with an .846 OPS, might one reasonably get a .750+ OPS? A .340-OBP .750-OPS SS, that wouldn't be that bad hitting 8th or even 2nd. And that would be worse than either of their career splits. Maybe this will be our lucky year where things like that will work out.

Khalil Greene, Dustin Pedroia, Kevin Youkilis, David DeJesus, Chris Capuano, Dave Bush, Hunter Pence, Brian Roberts, jon lieber, aaron heilman, dan johnson, ian kinsler, j.j. putz, joe blanton. to name a few. ... badnews isn't talking about college guys who get picked late and work out, he's talking college guys who get picked in the first round without huge buzz. Matt Murton and Brian Roberts are two of current relevance and recent history. Joe Blanton was one like that. (Safe and boring, low upside; not like the more exciting higher upside Brownlie, Hagerty, Clanton, and Purdue guy that we took.) Mike Mussina was scouted that way; good control, but not fast enough or big enough or with any dynamic pick to merit top ten. Roger Clemens also, he was a mid-first-round guy. Barry Zito scouted as a good curveball lefty but didn't throw very hard; didn't seem very exciting at the time, more likely to be another token lefty curveballer at the back of your rotation than an ace, and more likely to end up as a LOOGY than a rotation guy at all. Ryan Braun as I recall didn't scout all that jazzy either, a good hitter but not necessarily exceptional power or anything else. Certainly the Khalil Greene reports were somewhat muted; when we took him as a junior, he was viewed as a non-SS, a 3B without the power to play 3rd. Oops! And even when taken 1st round, he profiled as a safe conservative selection, and there were still Q's about his SS ability! (The thing that is now his greatest strength, apart from perhaps the HR power.) The CF for Boston, Ellsbury, just a speed and defense guy, no power. The Cubs Josh Donaldson certainly seemed a somewhat limited excitement pick. The reports didn't suggest he was a huge slugging prospect or a Pudge Rodriguez defensive prospect. But couple of weeks of good hitting in the minors and suddenly many of us are quite abuzz with his potential ceiling (relative to the world of catchers). One other factor is that different observers have differing evals of guys. And on writeup can sound very different from another. One writeup on Russell, maybe BA's, talked him down as a soft-tosser mid-80's. Another one talked about touching 91-92 with projection for increased velocity. So sometimes one writeup gives me a totally bored blah feeling, but some other source can make exactly the same prospect seem reasonably promising.

Not sure what the laughs are about that. It's logical. Pie is the intended starter, but he splits very badly vs LHP. He needs somebody to platoon with him. Fuld is a lefty, and while his splits are less extreme than Pie's, he's still not a guy you want to put on the team in order to be used primarily vs LHP. Having two lefties platoon with each other, that would be a first in the history of the game, I think. Plus, Fuld has not shown success above AA/AFL even against RHP. Willits would be a much preferable platoon for Pie, given his splits vs LHP. Versus RHP, Pie obviously is the favorite. Willits could conceivably be in the competition with Fuld and Patterson as first option in the event that Pie were to play himself back to Iowa.