craig

Defensively yes, offensively no. Kotsay has averaged 12 HR's a year. Some scouts who like Colvin think that if things go right for him, he could be a 30-HR guy. Colvin hit 16 HR in <500 AB in two pitcher-friendly minor leagues this year at age 21, and has a projectible frame that could add some muscle and additional power. He could be a good HR hitter if things go well for him. Big if, obviously.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3137870 List of guys offered arb, for later reference.

badnews, I forgot to mention one factor. If a team gets multiple A or B picks, then the 2nd's (or thirds) come after the other teams have received one. Badly phrased. In current case, both Houston and Oakland are potentiall entitled to 2 B picks, if their arbed B's all sign elsewhere. Each would get their first B pick before Kendall, based on team record. Both Kendall would precede their 2nd B picks, which will come at the back of the B group. By the way, here is a post that is relevant and I believe accurate. The good news is that Kendall will come no later than 43, and could well come as high as 41 or 40. 43 is worst case, and if guys like Barrett, Feliz, or Mahay resign, Kendall-pick could move even higher. As you say, it's really awesome that we're getting that good a pick for Kendall. Basically it comes down to Blevins for a 40-ish pick and a few months of Kendall's service which helped us make the playoffs. Blevins may end up better than the sandwich. But I can't complain much about that at all. "Reb66 - Dec 2, 2007 9:56 pm (#2270 of 2275) This is Keith Law's projection of the sandwich round order. >The sandwich round's order, assuming all of the remaining free agents who were offered arbitration sign with other clubs, would be the following:>> 31. Minnesota (for Torii Hunter) 32. Milwaukee (for Francisco Cordero) 33. NY Mets (for Tom Glavine) 34. Philadelphia (for Aaron Rowand) 35. San Diego (for Michael Barrett) 36. Milwaukee (for Scott Linebrink) 37. Kansas City (for David Riske) 38. San Francisco (for Pedro Feliz) 39. Houston (for Mark Loretta/Trever Miller) 40. Oakland (for Shannon Stewart/Mike Piazza) 41. St. Louis (for Troy Percival) 42. Atlanta (for Ron Mahay) 43. Chicago Cubs (for Jason Kendall) 44. San Diego (for Doug Brocail) 45. Arizona (for Livan Hernandez) 46. NY Yankees (for Luis Vizcaino) 47. Boston (for Eric Gagne) 48. Houston (for Mark Loretta/Trever Miller) 49. Oakland (for Shannon Stewart/Mike Piazza) 50. San Diego (for Mike Cameron) "

Not sure how expensive he'll be. But the word suggests he wants "only" 3 years, not the 5 or 6 that a normal American FA would want. 2nd, he's a FA, so while he'll cost a lot of money, he'll cost only money. Lou has (rightfully) said that FA doesn't offer other satisfactory alternatives, so that if not Fukudome, they'll trade. To get a good RF by trade will cost serious *talent*, as well as money. So in a sense, Fukudome may well be less expensive, given that losing talent in trade is a real cost.

Does anybody have an official link listing all of who were and weren't offered arbitration? That will be helpful in evaluating which picks go ahead of kendall and which behind. The only two keys that were not arbed that I've seen were Milton Bradley and A Jones, both of whom would have yielded picks ahead of Kendall.

Uh, are you sure that's not right? Because what you wrote doesn't look right from what I'm seeing. ...I don't understand how Percival gets a pick ahead of Kendall. I've seen it written a number of times that the picks are handed out according to rating. ..... Yes, I'm sure. What you've seen written a number of times isn't right. The way it works is that the sandwich is subdivided between A's and B's. The A's come first. Within the A's, it's based on the record of the team who lost the guys, not on the relative score of the player. Same for the B's. Just as the Cardinals will draft in the 1st round ahead of us, because their record was worse, so also they will draft ahead of us in the B-section of the sandwich round. Even though Kendall outscored Percival, that doesn't matter. Both were B's, and the Cards draft ahead of us in the B round just as they do in every other. I don't have a link to this rule, so of course you are free to doubt it until you see it confirmed by a more official source. I'm not sure where to get a detailed presentation. But as evidence, think about the Juan Pierre pick we got last draft. We got the very first B-pick in that draft. (The Donaldson sandwich pick came immediately after the A picks.) It was because we had the worse record of the B-picking teams, not because Pierre was the highest scoring B. (You can find the Elias scores from last year to confirm this.) And last year was already operating under the most recent union contract, so the Pierre precedent is relevant to the current rules.

Who stated that, and where? It isn't true. Four Type A's have already switched teams (Glavine, Cordero, Hunter, and Linebrink), and will give picks ahead of Kendall. Percival will give a B pick ahead of Kendall, brocail a B behind. So if every other free agent resigns with their own team or gets non-arbed tomorrow, Kendall's pick would be #36, I think. But there are still at least 6 Type A guys left, and around 20 Type B's left. So Kendall's pick can easily be bumped well lower than #41. Obviously some of those Type B's will be from teams who had better records than us, so those picks will come after Kendall's. And obviously some/most of the FA's will not generate comp picks, either because they resign with original team or because original team does not offer arb. So given how weak and small the FA class is this winter, I think kendall may well get us a pick in the mid-40's. But 35-41, that's not right. Arb-offer day is tomorrow, Dec 1. So if we go to the work, we'll have a much better grasp of how many comp-eligible FA's will still be out there after the weekend.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20070526/ai_n19179908 Nice find. Needs to be kept in context, though. Lou would like a LH bat that can hit LH pitching. But having a lefty bat to keep the lefty pitcher from getting grooved is obviously not an overarching priority for Lou. If so, he wouldn't have been taking the lefty bats that he did have (Jones, Floyd, Fontenot) out of the lineup versus LHP. It's also clearly not *the* driving factor in Lou's quest for lefty swingers this offseason either. For example, it's clear that the interest in matsui was impacted by his swinging lefty. But not because he'd swing lefty vs LHP and disrupt them, since he bats righty versus lefty pitchers. This is a preference for Lou, not a decision maker. If he thought Jones could hit LHP as well as Craig Monroe, he'd have preferred to keep Jones in the lineup. But even in the final week he was replacing Jones with Monroe because the disrupt-the-pitcher preference was outweighed by the Jones-can't-hit-lefties factor. In the case of the lefty outfielder that they want, I'm sure they'd really like a guy who could be an every-day guy and didn't need to be removed every time a lefty pitched. But for the lefty infielder they want, I think somebody who can hold his own versus RHP while batting lefty will be hard enough to find, getting one who can hit lefties while swinging left-handed, those are rare and more expensive than Hendry is likely to afford.

Sure. I don't think he's going to get a Santana contract off of two good starts. But I certainly expect that two good September starts would be all it would take to get a $40+ contract. And perhaps with plenty of incentives built in for big stuff. Lilly deal as base, with kickers for all-star or top-5-Cy or 200 innings, etc.. If Prior is working his way successfully through the minors, and that culminates in a couple of 6IP-5H-2ER-1BB-6K outings with 90+ velocity in September, don't you think there would be at least one team who'd rather pay him $10+/year than Lilly or Carlos Silva or Gil Meche? $10+ is now the rate for a #3-4 starter, so getting $40/4 isn't a big contract, obviously. To get a $90/5 guaranteed, he'll need more than two good starts, I agree. One other angle. Starts and innings are starts and innings. But post-op guys can give starts and innings that are of a much different quality than in their prime. It's well possible that Prior will come back, healthy enough to pitch. But will perform at a level more in the Marquis or even Jerome Williams level rather than vintage prior. Not sure how many $15 or $17 contracts for 2009 that hendry will want to offer Prior based on starts, if all he needs to do is give 30 Marquis-esque starts. I'm not arguing a Prior-advantageous deal can't be constructed. I'm sure it can. But it may not be easy, and it may require that the Cubs guarantee a substantial block of cash that might be more good money thrown down the drain in the event that prior does *not* come back healthy and effective. It might be easiest to just do the one-year, and wing it from there. Hendry has never lost a player that he's wanted to keep before. Prior is not the ordinary baseball personality or player, so he may well be the first.

As all of you guys have suggested, the key is to have enough incentives aind options and stuff to make a deal preferable to Prior than taking an arb-influenced Cub-controlled one-year. I just think that prior might want a lot to give up FA. All it will take is one or two end-of-year games in which Prior looks healthy and has some stuff to get teams super interested. It may be pretty difficult to get him to give up even an unconditional option for free agency. He doesn't need 20 starts or 10 starts or many of the incentive targets. One or two promising starts is all it will take to give him major earning power. Lefty, if indeed the new contract has dropped the 80% to 60%, that makes the non-tender possibility even more unlikely.

That would be pretty tough for Hendry to stay involved with Fukudome, I'd think. Getting a LH RFer has been his primary objective since the season ended. Most all teams are trying to shape their rosters and their budgets. Does Hendry really want to freeze that hunt and sit out the winter meetings and all of the roster resolutions that other clubs are making during December in order to wait for Fukudome? Unless he's really confident/sure that he's going to get Fukudome anyway, or that some desirable alternative will still be available in January, wouldn't stalling a Fukudome decision really paralyze absolutely everything else that hendry can do? So much so that Hendry might decide he can't wait any longer, and needs to get what he can here before it's too late?

The article said a scout said 29 teams would line up to talk. But Hendry's situation is that he can a) have him on a 1-year deal for $3 or so. b) persuade him to sign some 2-year or multi-year thing. c) nontender. If Hendry nontenders, the other teams aren't obligated to give the $3/1 deal Hendry has. They can offer $2/1, or whatever they please, and let the market set the price. But Hendry's lowest 1-year offer is constrained by the 80% rule. Would 29 teams line up to offer $3/1, when the 1 will be followed by free agency, and most/all of the 1 will be rehab? Maybe yes, but maybe no. And would 29 teams be lining up at Hendry's door to offer real trade value in order to get a $3/1 obligation for a rehab guy? Maybe yes, but if not it wouldn't surprise me. I assume that Hendry will tender him an offer, and continue to negotiate later. But if the $3/1 is what he gets stuck with, that he'll take that as the cost of doing business, and hope that Prior turns golden. I don't think that's necessarily too much to offer to retain control for at least a little longer. But it seems many of the deals suggested by posters are Cub-friendly deals. Control Prior beyond this year so we can get a really good pitcher if he does bounce back, but options and all kinds of protections in case he doesn't come back. I'm a Cub fan, so of course I want Cub-friendly deals. But a real deal needs to be Prior friendly or else he doesn't need to bother to sign it. It has to be more Prior friendly than $3/1 with the chance at complete free agency afterwards. 1-year then play the market is a very good scenario for Prior. Let the Cubs pay him $3/1, then see where you're at next winter. If you're healthy, make a killing then. If you're still recovering strength, some team will still offer one of these incentive-based deals. I think it will be hard for Hendry to offer Prior something that's more Prior-friendly than $3/1 then free agency. It will have to be a pretty high-ceiling deal to make it better than status-quo for Prior.

Well, Kendall is in the books for Milwaukee! Awesome that we get a pick out of him, I had hoped for that but thought that was really unlikely. Even after I heard Milwaukee and Rockies were interested, I was scared he'd take too long, and by the time he'd take his physical and stuff that we'd have to decline arb before then. But not only did they agree, it appears he always passed his physical and signed the contract and the deal is real. So Hendry doesn't need to do anything, the pick is ours. That should be fairly late in the sandwich round. Comp picks for A's come before picks for B's. Within each group, it goes by team record. Since we're 19/30 in regular rounds, Kendall should be in the 2nd half of the B group. Last year the sandwich round was a bit longer than a regular round. Not sure how that will play this year. But I kind of figure the sandwich is more or less like a full round. I'd like to have a sandwich pick every year, just to keep up with what most teams get. To go without any sandwich picks is really like skipping a round altogether. Anyway, very nice news. Right now we're pretty excited about what Donaldson might be. If lucky, maybe we can get somebody who proves to be as intriguing next year, thanks to Kendall and Milwaukee's conveniently fast decision-making.

I think it's really the last 3-4 games where he's gotten hot. Only a few days ago he was coming off a 3-18 type stretch. But the last several days he's really been getting the hits, and perhaps he'd been adding some walks even before that. Hope he can keep it up. Pie has always been a streaky hitter. His average is now up to .241, and his OPS at .691, which is actually higher than the modest .674 team OPS. But he's always been streaky. Every time he's had a hot spell, I've always hoped that he'd figured it all out and was not going to be hot forever. Maybe this is that time, I hope so. But a fair chance that he's running hot now and will run cold again, later. Still, he seems to be a guy who's stance looks different every time you see him. Some guys have a stance that they like, and stick to it all the time, hot or cold. But it seems that for most of his career Felix has been constantly fiddling and adjusting. Maybe he's finally struck gold and found the stance that will work for the rest of his career. The other thing with Pie is that he's usually been awful versus lefties. So I'm guessing several good games in a row might correlate facing several straight RH starters. Throw a lefty today, and perhaps back to 0-5 with 3 K's? I hope not, obviously. Really nice to see his winter stats on the rise. There would be nothing better for the Cubs than for Pie to make it as a legit good offensive player right off the bat this April.

$45/3 for Mariano, or $44/4 or whatever for Cordero, that is "big money". $4.2, that's not big money. When you have a $115 roster, and around ten guys who will be <$1 each, that leaves you with around $105 for 15 salaried guys. So the average salary for the salaried guys is around $7. $4 for a free agent is well below average. It's not "big money". It's the cost of doing business. Sure, I wish we'd have gotten him at $1 base, with a club option on year two that would cost $2.5 or $0.2 to buyout. But that's not the market.

I agree with all but this sentence. I know it wasn't the point of the post, though. I think when you take into account backloaded contracts and the fact that the players in 2010 will be 4 years older than they were when they signed that free agent contract, which usually happens around the mid-to-late prime years (28-32), then I doubt you see a bunch of future bargains. Sure Soriano may still be a 115+ player in 2010 and salaries may balloon to make his $20M/yr in the middle of the pack, but both are extremely unlikely and may or may not be worth the risk depending on other factors. Cordero just got a deal at $12-per. Torii Hunter got a deal that averages $16. Inflation this year continues. I suspect it will continue again next year, and in 2010. When hasn't that happened? So, let's look at the Cub contracts in 2010: *Aram: $15.75. Very large bargain potential, I'd say, for a guy who's .900+'d over the last many years, and was a gold glove candidate this year. *Lee: $13 in 2010. There's a chance he'll still be a high-OBP hitter with some HR's then. Bargain potential. (Granted, his was a 2005 contract). *Zambrano: $17.85 in 2010. He's a pitcher, so he's well likely to have a shot arm by then. But given the way the market is going for starting pitchers, he has a chance to be a bargain then. (Granted, he was a 2007 contract). *Lilly: $12 in 2010. By 2010, any average rotation pitcher might be getting that much or more on the free market. OK, not bargain potential, but could very well be good value. *Alf: $18.25 in 2010. Not much bargain potential, granted. But Torii Hunter will be averaging $16, so it's plausible that he'll be fair market if not bargain. The market price keeps rising. I seriously think that at least in the cases of Aram, Lee, and Z (the resignings), they have bargain potential in future. Granted, Soriano, not so much. He'd have to be a strong all-star, even in the MVP discussion, to make $18.25 a "bargain".

I don't think it's "insane" to do the following: 1. Think baseball payroll will inflate. (Other than year post-strike, when has it not?) 2. Think that the guys you sign will remain productive, when the guys long-term are people like Aram, Lee, and Soriano, each of whom has performed at a level that is good or better than good over a while, without being old. 3. Believe in scouting. Every GM and his scouts are wrong in their scouting evalutions sometimes, and they may be wrong in thinking Fukudome is any good. But it would be insane to hire/retain scouts who you assume will always be wrong. If they believe that Fukudome is good, why would it be insane to try to acquire him? 4. Try to maximize your talent. If you sign Fukudome, assuming he's good, you've increased your talent. If you trade, the norm is that you are exchanging talent for talent. If you sign a FA, you add talent; if you trade, you reshuffle talent. It doesn't seem insane to try to increase your talent if you can afford to do so. 5. It would seem to be insane to assume that players who have been good in past and/or whom your scouting people project to be good will play bad and get you fired. Where would be the sanity in that? Is hendry a good scout? Is his plan a good one? I don't know. If they get Fukudome and he proves to be the player they project him to be, I think he'd be a good fit. A good plan. Don't see how trading good talent for Church is better. Personally I think there can be value in long-term deals.... if the guys you sign to them say healthy and play well. Salaries inflate. Contracts signed in 2006 may be huge value bargains by 2010, etc.. Having some defined contracts also makes it easier to plan ahead, when at least some of the dollar stuff is pre-known and some of the positions are known ahead of time. There is higher risk and also higher reward. Baseball team-building is inherently risky. It's not "insane" to take on long-term contract risk. It would be insane not to. The question is how many, which player, etc..

cal, thanks for the Petrick note. (And yes, I did mean that Callis *did* think his arm was fine!!) PeoriaChiefs, thanks a ton for your feedback on the Peoria pitchers. Fastballs that sink are what you'd like. If Maestri is 90-92 with some downward movement, that's perhaps as-or-more effective as somebody else's 92-95 4-seamer. So that sounds very encouraging. The comments on herandez, Ruhlman, and Siegfried are also encouraging. Nice to hear that Siegfried seems like an eager learner, and was good in instrux. Would seem to me that his fastball and curve both have excellent stuff potential; the question would seem to me more consistency and control. That might come along faster with the innings a starter gets than in relief. badnews: as pointed out, many/most of the cubs high HS picks have begun season-after-draft in full-season ball. Corey, Kelton, Goldbach, Montanez all did. Pie and Cedeno also skipped ahead to full. Those who didn't were raw talents who were really struggling or were hurt: Harvey, Dopirak, pawelek. (All of whom have subsequently confirmed that they aren't very good at what they do. So they were clearly unqualified for promotion, regardless of draft position.) In Vitters case, I assume it's a question of whether he's polished enough and is qualified and ready to compete. I think the Cubs do try to read the personalities. For some guys who may be more confidence-challenged, they may want to make sure they aren't put at a level where they'll get dominated and get discouraged. I think Pawelek may have been in that school. They seem to talk up Vitters as if he's very solid that way, so they may not be as protective of him as some other guys. It's a question of whether his skills will be enough so that he can compete and be at least reasonably successful in full-A. Most hitters drafted that high are, including the names you mentioned. One would expect Vitters should be, but what one expects doesn't always turn out, and guys don't always perform to their draft status. On slow promotions: Hendry has said that he doesn't like to promote guys that often during their first full season. Colvin is an exception, but most of the other guys don't get promoted till late season, even if doing rather well. Eric Patterson in A- is an example. I agree that if Russell looks good in spring, that he's a likely Daytona candidate. As mentioned, he was the Friday starter for Texas, one of the highest-profile college programs. And he's got some control and an alread competitive change. He's not a raw guy who necessarily needs A- experience, he can likely compete at A+. Holliman was a good example of a successful big-time college program pitcher, straight to A+. Thomas, Barney, Wright, and Smith also seem like big-program college guys, any-or-all of whom might open at Daytona. I'd think donaldson could too, except that he hasn't been catching that long and his defense is still far from polished. (Different from Barney, Smith, or Wright). Plus, he's got a blocked problem: Welington Castillo is also an excellent catching prospect, and almost certainly preferable to Donaldson defensively at the present time. So if donaldson does skip to Daytona, it would have to be as a share-time catcher. I don't think that's likely, but it's not impossible, since usually the Cubs have even their best catching prospects catch every-other-day anyway. Nathan, I think the idea of Hernandez repeating Peoria to work with Rosario is interesting and might be a good idea. Not sure the Cubs have ever held back a guy who had as effective a season as he did, though, and wasn't blocked.

Thanks much, cal. I'd hoped a guy with his size and stats would be serious. For a guy who was still 16 in April, his results were very good. Here's hoping he turns out to be a real good one and stays healthy all the way. Let's go, Yohan! Where'd you get the Fleita info, and did he have anything else to share? Gonzalez clearly had the best combo of size and stats for the 17-year-old RHP. We've already gotten some favorables on the lefty Antigua, but he was obviously not a summer signing.

I'm going to try to rationalize the Cubs thinking. 1. Hendry wants to give Lou what he wants. Lou has a good reputation, Lou had a good season, so to large degree I think Hendry wants to accede to Lou's preferences unless it's really expensive or he feels it really wrong. Lou has clearly stated that he wants more speed, more base-stealing, and more lefty bats. I'd think this should be put on Lou at least as much as on Hendry. 2. Using win shares stuff (http://www.hardballtimes.com/thtstats/main/index.php?view=winshares&linesToDisplay=50&season_filter[0]=2007&league_filter[0]=NL&pos_filter[0]=2B&Submit=Submit&orderBy=wsp&direction=DESC&page=1), Matsui had a higher winshares score than DeRosa last year, defense included (relative to playing time.) I don't know all the calculations, but I think the James stuff is normally pretty thorough, and would include park factors and the like. Maybe Hendry or Lou are looking at those and believe that matsui last year was comparable to DeRosa? 3. Matsui's career OPS vs RHP is almost identical to DeRosa's career OPS vs RHP. Until 2007, DeRosa has had large LHP/RHP splits. If DeRosa settles back to his previous level, Lou may feel that Matsui is as good a hitter vs RHP, but superior defensively and as a baserunner. 4. Matsui's SB/CS record is very good. He rarely gets caught. His SB/CS-adjusted career OPS is comparable to DeRosa's career OPS. 5. DeRosa, Theriot, Cedeno, and Infante are all RH. Matsui is not. Lou values lefty-righty stuff very highly. 6. Lou may think that Matsui might be a preferable fit batting 2nd vs RHP than either DeRosa or Theriot. 7. Lou and Hendry like DeRosa's flexibility. DeRosa needs to get used at 3b or wherever sometimes. Lou probably sees matsui as preferable at 2B than Cedeno or Infante when DeRosa plays elsewhere. 8. It's possible that while they aren't counting on it, Lou is still hoping that either Matsui or DeRosa might prove to be acceptable defensively at SS, relative to Theriot. If Theriot is lousy versus RHP again, and if either Matsui or DeRosa can be used at least some at SS, Lou might like that option relative to Infante.

Good to hear from you. I agree that Thomas will likely skip to Daytona. I'd agree with Cal that you'll get Donaldson for sure. Vitters, I wonder. He'll be 18 till the last week of the season, so if he's in Peoria he'll be really, really young. Robbie Chirinos and Felix Pie are the only position guys I can recall opening full-A as young or younger than Vitters will be next spring. If Vitters struggles in camp, I wouldn't be surprised if he gets held back. Hopefully, of course, he won't struggle, he'll come to camp hitting and make Peoria and hit great there, too. ChiefsVoice, it's great to hear that Maestri looks so good. Two questions: 1) Could you say anything about his fastball, both velocity-wise and movement/type? Is he a guy who's ordinarily around 90-92 or so, or is that too fast? Do you know if he has some sink or 2-seam action on his fastball, or would the movement be relatively normal/average? 2) In minorleaguebaseball, they list him at 5'11", which isn't very tall for a RHP. So I've been imagining a relatively short guy who maybe wouldn't be likely to throw to hard or to project any added velocity future. But I watched a half-inning on a youtube clip, and he appeared to me to be relatively lanky, perhaps still somewhat projectible, and it appeared to me that while he wasn't tall for a pitcher, that he wasn't short either. Looked as tall as Russ Canzler, for example, who lists at 6'2". Any idea how tall he is, either in terms of 6'x" guestimate, or in terms of how his height compares to other guys on the team? Related questions: 1. Could you share any post-season thoughts on Robert Hernandez? I'm guessing his best asset is the movement on his fastball? Is he a guy who was normally in the 88-91 kind of range, velocity-wise? But perhaps projects to get faster down the road as he fills out more? Promising change? What does he have, if anything for a breaking pitch? Would you say it's more curve or more of a slider? Is that the pitch that's most raw, and needs the most work? 2. Lambert got listed by BA with the best curve in the system, and Callis was suggesting that he could become a good lefty relief prospect, look out Ohman and Eyre. Did you like what you saw from him? 3. Ruhlman had some fairly interesting numbers. Is he a guy who maybe has the stuff to be pretty serious, if he can get more consistent? Whose stuff can look pretty impressive when he's locating it? Or is his stuff definitely not as exciting relative to some of the other guys? 4. I know you only saw him twice, and his numbers were excellent. But could you share any impressions on James Russell? The scouting perspective I've gotten is that he's got a good change, but fastball is question mark. Some reports have suggested that he throws quite soft, mostly mid-80's, i.e. probably velocity is a liability unless he can really spot it. A different report suggested that at least on occassion he gets it up to 90 or even 92, and may have a bit of projection left besides, in which case velocity isn't a liability, even if it isn't necessarily a strength either. Any impression from your view? 5. Chris Siegfried: My impression is that his fastball can be excellent and his curve outstanding, on a given day when he's locating. But that he's really raw and inconsistent. Does that jive with what you saw? I thought I heard the Cubs were maybe considering trying Siegfried in rotation. Not likely, but have you heard anything like that and would that make sense from your view? Thanks a lot. It's always great to get some thoughts from somebody who's seen guys in action.

Good Q on Petrick, Callis didn't seem to think his arm is fine. That would be nice. I thought his comments on Castillo, Rhee, Maestri, Hernandez were favorable. Awfully positive on Thomas. Hopefully the Cubs will be right that they can polish up his defense and work him into a satisfactory 2B. If he could play 2B, his bat would look a lot jazzier. The Vitters/Aram comp was a good one, I thought. The tools do seem to match: contact hitting power 3B with very strong arm. If he hits like Aram, he'll be #1, no doubt about that. The comment that one of the AZ scouts loves Fuld and thinks he can be a regular, that was encouraging too. But the fact that he's got Fuld equivalent to Fox, not so much, and don't think it makes sense. Utility players who can play multiple positions at satisfactory level and hit, valuable. Utility players who are utility player because they can't play any position satisfactorily, not valuable. Fox can't catch. Don't think his bat gets him all that far as a utility 1B/RF/LF who is bad at each of them. Not too buzzed on Atkins. Disappointed that he views Barney as slower and undertooled defensively relative to Theriot. I think hopefully that may be more a matter of overrating Theriot's tools defensively. Comment that he sees the system as similar, relative to the leagues, as last year when we rated 18th, that was interesting too. Bad: With our budget, we should be better than that. Good: To hold, despite losing Guzman, Pie, and Marmol from the list, and having Veal and Samardz and Pawelek all flop bigtime (those were three who might have blossomed into real elevators), maybe to hold ground isn't too bad.

He had four stops last year: HS team, Mesa Cubs, Boise Cubs, and AFL instrux games. He hit .390 in HS; anytime a guy doesn't hit .400 or better in HS, I don't think he's hitting really well. He hit 0.067 in 7 games at Mesa; in 7 games at Boise he hit .190. I don't have stats for what he did in instrux, but based on games that Arizona Phil reported on, Vitters again had relatively few hits. Each are small samples, the last one lacks actual statistical record, there are excuses for each (was sick during spring, was rusty when the Cubs signed him), and he was 17 till late August. So I wouldn't worry too much about a mediocre 100 bats in HS and then 50 crummy pro AB's. If he's hitting next season, the scattered 2007 numbers will be totally forgotten and dismissed as nonrepresentative. meph and the scouts say there's not much question but that he'll hit. I wouldn't worry about it too much.

I found it interesting that Maestri was listed as best slider. I understood his fastball was fine, but hadn't gotten the impression it was exceptional. Now we know. Fastball/slider, that's the easiest combo to throw for strikes. 0.86 WHIP is pretty good, even if over only 84 innings in relief. There are numerous useful fastball/slider guys in bigleague relief. http://web.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?n=Alessandro%20Maestri&pos=P&sid=milb&t=p_pbp&pid=493256 Sometimes its fun to look at the "last ten games" data. For Maestri: 10games/14IP/20K/1BB/3hits. He was obviously pretty grooved in by the end. Wonder if he'll just step up to Daytona, or will skip right to AA at age 22 next spring.

Thanks, Cal. I forgot Burke. Not sure where I'd put him. I think he'd break my top-30. Not sure about top-20. So many K's against low-minors and Hawaii pitching, he'll need to fix that or else hit an awful lot of HR's. Cal, I think I asked this before and you didn't know. Do you know anything about the extend of Cabrera's arm injury? Did he have surgery yet, or not sure?