craig

Thanks for the info, cal. Keep em coming, fun. Vitters seems to continue to be one of the lesser hitters. But mostly interesting postive stuff. That they really did sign Rhee is great news. The notes on Suarez having the big stuff but looking sullen and smile-free, that's interesting too. That may be bad, sullen people who don't enjoy their work have a harder time with everything. But, serious guys can be very successful, has Lilly ever cracked a smile? hasn't hurt his season. If Z was a little less zany and a little more serious, that might be fine. the notes on Castillo's throwing, I liked those. Other things I liked: *Clevenger catching, Reed not catching. (Although why Reed is there at all, I dunno. I suppose you need lots of catchers when you're training lots of pitchers, but I'd like to see him released, myself, to get out of the way for major-league prospects.) *The three Mexican kids. *With Rhee from Korea, Chen and his Taiwan friend, that Australian kid, Maestri from Italy, the recent Dutch kid, now the several Mexicans, nice to see the cubs broadening their scope from just Venez and DR. Was a long 5 haul where Venez and DR were pretty much our only international spot. *The favorable comments about Huseby's progress were also really encouraging.

Yes. Obviously yes, if the Cubs don't roster him. But I think the Cubs have the right to place him on the 40-man roster first, in which case he wouldn't be eligible for minor-league free agency. Not so? I don't know whether they like him well enough to burn a 40-man roster spot on him. But I'd think it's at least possible.

No, it's primarily been fielding. He's gotten negatives on almost every aspect. Some throwing problems. The previous post about poor range. His problems turning the DP have been mentioned more than once. Didn't BA's prospect book refer to something positive last book, though? Was it soft hands, maybe? On Kroeger, I think he might have a shot at a 40-man roster spot. But not certain they'll spend one on him. I don't think there's any chance he'll be starting regularly for a major-league team next season, barring several injuries. Well, at least not in the spring. I think he'd need to put together a real good stretch at AAA to get a shot. Maybe pull a Soto or something like that. Not sure a .275-type average will get it done, though. But if he could do in AAA comparable to what he did in AA, who knows. But I think he'll need to prove it/earn it again.

I'd expect Soto and Colvin to be on BA's list. As raw noted, there are lots of outfielders who make it every year. For a 21-year old to hit around .300 in A+/AA with 16 HR, projection, and good tools (arm, speed, defense), I think BA routinely includes guys like that. As Lord K said, perhaps as high as 75. Soto they've got to include, and his success with the Cubs may force them to reevaluate their previously tepid interest. Hard to not include a guy who's got an open door to a big-league job, who's had a really good big-league debut in his small window, and who hit for power, average, and walks in AAA. gallagher I'd think could be in there, although it wouldn't shock me if he wasn't. He's young and has had good minor-league success. Stuff isn't "Wow", but BA's been aware of him for a while now. Possibly another back-of-top-100 guy. Samardz, might be in there. There are still scouts BA talks to who seem to like his talent considerably, and their Cub sources are still very favorable. Plus he's a story guy, a good discussion guy for them. Put him in somewhere in the back, at 90 or whatever. If he busts, nothing rare about that at the back of your top-100. But if he blossoms, you can say that you were listing him as a guy to watch all along. Can't lose. I'd be rather surprised to see Patterson in there, on BA's list. Prospectus, different story, since their assessment of defense is very different from the average human scout. Patterson is a jumble of puzzles. I don't really know what he is. As a good defensive 2B, I'd view him as well worthy of Top-100 rank. But not as a bad defensive 2B, or a bad defensive CFer, or a utility outfielder with a below-average arm. My understanding is that by some statistical measures, there are indicators that his 2B defense isn't too bad, may actually be fairly good. But I don't think the BA boys read those, and based on past reports the human scouts they've talked to have been pretty negative about Eric's 2B defense. I know Fleita will say he moved him to outfield to make him more flexible and more useful as a bench player, and that is logical. But I also wonder whether that move isn't really a reflection that they don't see him as a big-league caliber defensive 2B. Can't lose for the pro-Patterson posters. If he makes it big, they're smart, win. If he doesn't, just use that to prove the Cubs are idiots to have moved him, if they'd kept him at 2nd he'd be great, Cubs ruined him, Cubs are dumb, win again! Win win! I'll be shocked if BA loves his defense enough to include him in top-100.

I think kc's analogy of Colvin to Jacque is perhaps quite apt. I've often thought that Jones was also an excellent optimistic comp for Pie as a hitter. I still think Pie's got a shot to be a good-fielding version of Jacque, perhaps without Jacque's former power? Obviously that comment is intended to be critical, since Jacque doesn't generally have a favorable rep. But I'm not sure that's really such a bad outcome. Jacque's been in the majors for approaching ten years, and will end up making oer $30 mill for his career. That's not necessarily such a bad career for a guy. And it's not necessarily such a bad payoff for an organization to get somebody like that with a teens pick in a weak draft. I also think it's a reasonable comp, but not necessarily representative of the best outcome imaginable. Colvin might hit more HR's. He might be a better CFer. Colvin played the season at 21, so I think it's premature to assume we know what he'll be when he's 26 or 32. Ditto for Pie. Colvin his 16 HR's in 125 AB's in two tough leagues at age 21. A lot of guys who end up as 30-HR guys at age 28 playing 162-game big-league seasons weren't necessarily hitting 20 in shorter minor-league seasons at age 21. Scouting may suggest differently, and often scouting knows things. But I'd think his XB/HR output this year might look very promising for his power future. I think the Jacque analogy depends in part on the defense. Jaque's in his 30's and is playing CF. I'm too dumb to tell. Some observers criticize his defense as being way sub-par; others who I respect seem to think it's actually pretty average for a CF. If Colvin was enough better to be unambiguously acceptable in CF, combined with a much better arm, a Jacque bat in center would be decent. Career .782 OPS, not sure that's below average for a CF, is it? I thought most years there are only a handful of .800+ CFers. Obviously the walks is the big red flag. He's not a perfect prospect, that's for sure, and we know it takes only one deadly flaw to keep a guy from being overall valuable. But as was noted, if he could reduce that problem from horrific to merely bad, you'd have a shot to have a useful major leaguer. And obviously the defense is a huge factor. A .780 platoon CFer is one thing; a .780-platoon RFer, that's another. I think it's also true that some of the optomism may be self-contradictory. I want him to be a good enough defender to play CF. But I also want him to gain strength and become a serious HR hitter. Those two wishes may well be incompatible. Buildup for power may perhaps work against CF mobility. Unfortunately apart from the defense issue, I think many of the same comps and concerns for Colvin also apply to Pie.

I think this is a helpful perspective. I think it's clear that hernandez has a chance to be a very, very substantial prospect. Not to be negative, but there are several obvious distinctions between hernandez and Carlos's Class A seasons. 1. Z did *not* spend a full season in full-A. He listed at only *17* for much of that year. According to his list birthday, he didn't turn 18 until June of his Peoria-equivalent season. 2. I have always suspected that the Cubs didn't really think Carlos was only 17. I've always tended to assume they figured his age was somewhat falsified. That was pre-age-gate. So while Z may have listed younger, it's possible that Hernandez actually is younger than was Carlos. Not that looks tell all, but from his face nothing to make you question that Hernandez really is 18, he looks quite young. 3. By late that season, I recall a report on Z throwing 98 in the 9th inning of a complete game. The scouting on him clearly showed a monster power pitcher. Hernandez scouts really really well, but not that well. 4. Z was an extreme groundball guy in those days, which goes with the low K's. hernandez is a definite fly-ball guy at this point. 5. Carlos in A- was one thing; but he jumped straight up to AA the next spring, at age 18, and dominated his way up to Iowa, shortly after his 19th birthday if not before. Doing well as Hernandez has done at age 18 in A- is one thing; to carry a 1.34 ERA in AA at age 18 as Z did in spring of 2000, that's another. Not dissing Hernandez, I'm really interested in him. And I believe when Tim had people rank prospects last winter, I think I was one of if not the only contributor who included him in my top-40. But Z's production-per-age pre-Iowa was really remarkable. Even if he didn't have much of a breaking ball or much control then, such that there were doubts whether he was strictly relief or could make it as a rotation guy. And even if Juan Cruz's breaking ball and thus overall package often got even more enthusiastic evals. Ceda, that guy's been pretty incredible. Will be interesting to see how his control improves in future, and if his arm can hold together. But his combo of fastball (velocity and movement) and breaking ball is obviously pretty dominant relative to A-. he walks a guy most innings, will be interesting to see how that goes in future. If he can get even respectable control, he could be a pretty scary relief pitcher.

Shoulder, elbow, or manager is just tired of his ineffective pitching and wants to start somebody who gives the Chiefs a chance to win? How has Siegfried and Lambert looked? Both have had some really nice box-score nights, and some others that aren't good. If Siegfried's control comes around a little bit, does he have a shot to be a good big-league reliever? One more Q on those two: Is Siegried a normal delivery, or does he throw some sidearm? Same for Lambert.

cal, in yesterday's thread you mentioned Hughes being in there for quite a while. Can you share any information or insights on prospects or the way the Cubs handle prospects from stuff he said? Or impressions on Hughes the guy, in terms of how smart or dumb or competent or incompetent he sounded? Thanks in advance.

thanks for the defensive breakdowns, cal. Perez and Castillo looking pretty good on the CS/SB angle. And Soto with low PB and low errors. Mark Reed has been a high draft and they've liked him. So perhaps Fleita and those guys have been reluctant to give up on him. But I'd think that if they liked Clevenger defensively, he'd be 20 times the prospect that Mark "Cesar Izturis" Reed is. If he can't beat out Reed for playing time, perhaps that speaks to how little they think of his defense. But, hopefully that's changing and Reed has kind of gotten that action on basis of tenure and past hype.

So, no other last-minute Cub draftees who signed? Or wouldn't we know? I think all this "slot" stuff and the Bud ripping is silly. The best interests of the league would obiously be to have a firm slot system, ala NBA and NFL. If the majority of the teams agree on that, and try to work more-or-less within that, that's their prerogative. Those that do know that the Yankees may not, the Cubs may not, etc.. And they all know that their is no enforcement possible. How could there be? The clubs and the agents all know that their isn't really any possibility of enforcement. If the majority of clubs establish majority consensus slot guidelines, the majority of players are happy to sign within those guidelines. Bud and the majority of teams aren't in the wrong to try to work together to that effect. Obviously there will be a minority of players who will not follow those, whether that be Porcello or Wieters or Samardzija or James Russell or Rundle or Brackman or Huseby, and teams can decide how many of those they are willing to pay. I just hope it's us doing it again, more, next year.

We don't know a lot, other than what you've noted from the stats. He's quite a contact hitter. He's caught 5 games out of 28 at Daytona, 11 out of 22 at Boise. I've been watching carefully on the occassion when he's caught. I haven't noticed an inordinate number of passed balls or errors. And I haven't seen any stolen bases against in his last couple of starts. So it's not obvious that he's a butcher. Still, that they use a guy with his bat so little at catcher, that makes me a think they probably don't project his catcher defense as being that great. Combine that kind of contact hitting skill with a catcher who can catch and you'd have something. Obviously he only started catching last fall. So I'm hoping their limited usage of him at catcher doesn't really reflect on his catching potential. That by next summer he'll be catching regularly, and will be on track to be a quality major-league defensive catcher. If that were to happen, he'd be a pretty valuable prospect. I'm a little uncertain where he might find regular catching action next year, though. Wellington Castillo is the best position prospect at Peoria and has good potental both defensively and as a hitter. He's gotta be regular catcher at Daytona next year. Often they do catchers every-other-day, so if Clev and Castillo were alternate-day catchers for Daytona, that would be great for Clevenger. That's probably his best hope. I assume Donaldson might be regular for Peoria, so perhaps Clev could also drop back there and be an alternate-day catcher. While Clevenger's bat could likely handle Tenn, it seems unlikely they'd want to entrust the AA pitching staff to a catcher with less than 20 games of pro catching experience, and less than 10 in full-season ball. If he does go to AA, I'd guess it would be more utility and 3rd-string catcher action. Not likely, but one possiblity would be to skip Donaldson up to A+ and make him the alternate-day catcher with Castillo. That seems unlikely, since Donaldson still has a ways to go defensively, so I think they'll likely step him along more slowly. And, if both Donaldson and Castillo were at Daytona, it would be impossible for both to get anything beyond half-time catching practice. But if they did go that way, then Clevenger could have an obvious shot to fit into Peoria's catcher rotation. Having hit well at Daytona, that wouldn't make sense as a hitter. But since defense is his issue, that might work for him. Not likely, though. If he never gets beyond 3rd-string catcher, then his future isn't as bright. so I'm really hoping that he has what it takes to catch, and that the Cubs do what it takes to give him the opportunity to develop as a defensive catcher and find out whether it could be possible eventually.

Interesting news. Ping gets the ITYS! Both of these guys are certainly qualified for the promotion. Smith has been quite productive, really. A couple fewer K's, a couple extra HR's, and his numbers would look even better. .381 OBP, he's a walk machine (37 walks in 193 AB), not many Cubs who walk at 20% rate. Hardman has not done much for Peoria, so wright could fit right in in LF. I really hope Smith and Wright do well in their 2-3 weeks plus hopefully playoffs for Peoria. As 4th year seniors with lots of college experience and from high-profile college programs, I'd think both are excellent candidates to skip straight to Daytona next year, along with Wyatt. (Wyatt also deserves promotion, but I imagine Boise needs him and promotion would provide a conflict with Leon Johnson.) If Wright and Smith get killed at Peoria (unlikely), that might work against Daytona for them next April. But if they carry their hitting right along at Peoria, that would further support their odds of going straight to Daytona next spring. I had rationalized that a promotion for these guys didn't matter much, they wouldn't develop any differently, and their chance of skipping to Daytona likely wouldn't depend on two weeks in Peoria this month. So I didn't think it was any big deal that they weren't getting promoted. But I certainly have zero problem that they did. I like it. I do think it's odd that they waited so late. I've gotta think there is a little adjustment time normally with any move. I'd have thought they might go up a week or more sooner, and give them a longer stretch at Peoria to get a more meaningful sample size there. [/i]

Possible. Not sure it's almost certain, though; Lou hasn't been too eager to start these 25th man emergency callups.

I would be shocked if Vitters gets an AB this summer after he presumably signs tomorrow. He's been out of the loop for months now, and they routinely seem to have at least a week or more form when a guy signs till when he plays, often longer. Not sure what that involves. Practice? Perhaps they go through some organizational orientation stuff? Beats me. But there's not likely to be enough season left to make it worth Vitters playing in any games. If anything, that's just asking for a downer. Advanced hitters like Donalsdon and Thomas didn't hit at Mesa for their first few games, I recall that with guys like Fox etc. in the past too. It's just asking to have a meaningless but depressingly low stats-line on his stats page to ask him to play out the last ten games of the season. Few high draft picks play much their first year. In past, most HS guys would drag out the negotiations and back them up against the college year. In fact, I can only remember two, maybe three HS guys recently who signed quickly enough to get in some meaningful first-summer action: Luis Montanez, Pawalek, and perhaps Harvey. Heh, hopefully Vitters is avoiding their path! I would be really shocked if Vitters opened at Peoria next spring. If so, he'll need to really knock their socks off in fall camp and spring training. He's only 17. No rush. Any rumblings that they might sign anybody else? I'm still kind of hoping that they'll surprise us and sign somebody else before the deadline. But I don't expect that, it would be a surprise.

Have we gotten any bonus info on Acosta yet? Splinter, given that he was a HS shortstop, I'd be really shocked if he opened at Peoria right off the bat. Splinter, any sense for whether we'll sign anybody else other than Vitters before the deadline tomorrow? Last year Huseby was a big surprise, and I was rather surprised to see Russell sign this year, at superslot. I'd like to see another superslot surprise pop up. Pre-draft, Wilken talked more than once about tracking some guys over the summer leagues and maybe signing somebody at the end. Two months of summer isn't quite like a D+F full spring season, and obviously guys can't physically mature between June and August the way they can between June and May. But it would be fun to get a surprise signing or two here at the last minutes. By the way, Wilken's D+F work last round looks very interesting. Rosa, Hatley, and Redmond have all been pretty interesting. And Latham has spotted some good outings, too.

I don't see that. vitters will likely be in short-season. Donaldson and Burke are the only Boise producers who are sure to go to Peoria. Well, Johnston, if you include him. Rundle's over his head now, will likely be again if he jumps next April. I'd guess that of wright, Wyatt, and Smith, at least one or two will skip to Daytona. If it was today, I'd have Johnson and Hardman repeat Peoria, with Wright and Wyatt skipping to Daytona. Lansford will obviously get promoted, and Castillo. So I'd guess Smith might just go to Peoria rather than skip. Thomas might skip to Daytona, but probably would stay at Peoria, he seems much less polished than Wright and Wyatt both offensively and defensively. But, if he skipped, and assuming Clevenger repeated at Daytona, Daytona could have a pretty high-average lineup next year.

I don't see that it's much of a big deal. Rundle and Boyer are getting plenty of action, and clearly should not be at a higher level. Wright and Wyatt clearly could be at a higher level. But, what would be the point? Are they going to develop significantly differently at Peoria that they will at Boise? I don't imagine it makes any difference at this point. They've both had very productive seasons, Wyatt especially, at Boise. Given their age, and their current output, both would seem destined to open at Daytona next year if they look good in camp(s). For their careers, I don't think it makes any difference. If anything, it's fine to stay put, finish up strong, and finish with some sense of team. Don't need to get introduced to a new host family, don't need to learn a new manager and hitting coach and Hardee's. Johnson is a prospect. Having spent a good chunk at Mesa and then up to Peoria (based on merit at the time), to bounce him back down to Boise would be kind of too much jerking. Let him play through whatever slump he's got. And, there are also playoff considerations, etc.. I'm not up on the minor-league standings, but Wright and Wyatt are integral to Boise's playoff chances. Keep them there, get in, win some playoff games, that's fun and good for development too. Let Peoria take their chances with the guys they've got, including Adduci who's produced. And, I think it's iffy to always decide who's got ceiling and who doesn't. Wyatt and Wright have hit for average, for contact, with some power, and with some walks in college, and now in Boise. Wyatt's OBP is around .440 or so, OPS near 1.000. Given his age, that doesn't prove he'll be good. But sometimes a guy actually is good, and just because he's in a younger league doesn't mean he might not have figured hitting out. Wright walks as often as he K's, plays an excellent outfield, and has hit some HR's and doubles to go with his batting average. For all we know he'll end up as a Murton-bat with a little more power and a much better glove? Who's to say guys like that who can field and can hit moving pitches don't have a higher ceiling than guys like Rundle and Harvey who perhaps hit or project to hit longer batting-practice home runs, but don't have the talent to read and hit actual moving pitches?

EPatt was one callup that cost a 40-man. He wouldn't have needed to be rostered till after 2008. Fox up for Eric, that would be fine. Who cares, neither is likely to get more than 1 AB per series, and neither is likely to get any hits. Pigs, that's more odd. Gallagher stunk the other night, try a new face? That doesn't seem to make sense, since Pigs has been a very short guy this year, even if he was long previously. Eyre stunk the other night, dump him? That could make some sense, although Lou has seemed pretty committed to Eyre and Hendry seems pretty unable to dump that guaranteed contract, for Trib reasons or whatever. Maybe Kerry, he'd been throwing over 90 mph for perhaps as many as ten outings between his rehab and Cub time, so with his sub-90's velocity yesterday perhaps a fair chance his shoulder has taken as much as it could stand and he's ready to return to the DL?

I'm not Raisin, but I'll try to answer this. The regular outfield is: *Wright in left (41 games in left, one in right), *Wyatt in center (48 games), and *Burke in right (35 games, 1 in left), *Rundle is utility OF (19 in right, some maybe before Burke came over and got established?; 10 in left; 5 in center). It might make sense to move Wyatt up to Peoria, but not so much. Leon Johnson is the CF there, and he was drafted higher than Wyatt and is as old. Adduci is the peoria RF. Neither Burke nor Rundle really need to get promoted at this point to replace him. Peoria LF is a scramble, and Wright could go there. Seems to me it's fine to let things stand. The only reason I'd see to be concerned about the Boise outfield is if you're really motivated to get Rundle more action. But since he's hitting only .214, I'm not sure getting him a bigger role is urgent. And he pretty much plays a lot as is, so it's not like he's getting blocked out.

Very temporary! 6 earned runs in 6 innings, 5.23 ERA.

cal, have you heard anything on Boise's Santana? He had 6 K's in his 2 otherwise ineffective innings yesterday. His performance has been spotty at times, but there have been days when his line looks pretty good. Is this a guy who's got a pretty good arm? If in some future year his performance was consistently good, is it possible that he's got a major-league arm if he were to end up with major-league control? Petty interesting to have Pawelek back, and to have a rare no-walk outing.

Thanks much, Cal. That's great news for AlAl, even if not for Huseby. OK, I'll add him to my real talent list, possible reliever or trade bait someday. His perfrormance lately has been more jazzy, 14 K's in his last two outings, 8 K's in 3 innings last time, even if he did allow 3 runs. So, you are vindicated that he has something. His Peoria output and Nathan's report certainly didn't reflect any 95 mph fastball. But, fortunately things change.

This is second hand news, but a friend from Bleacher Bums board attende all three of the recent Tenn games at WTenn, and gave some scouting information. he reports on I believe 7 pitchers, Veal, Mendez, Henderson, Johnson, Avery, Roquet, and Schappert. He reported that Schappert maxed out around 82. The other six were all almost the same in terms of velocity. Veal 90-93, touched 94 once, was down to 88-90 by last inning. Said Veal had both a sharp curve and slider that break into the dirt, but that he threw only maye one for a strike all game, most of them weren't even close. He said he mostly just threw high 4-seam fastballs. They either bashed them for hits, hard flyouts, foul balls, or eventually would strike out after long AB's with lots of fouloffs. He said that Veal just looked like a thrower. He thought Veal looked Ohman but with even less control. Said Mendez was 91-92. Said Henderson was 90-93, but that his slider wasn't too hot that night. (A different poster saw henderson recently at Tennessee, and said that he threw harder than anybody he's seen for Tennesse all year, including having watched Veal a couple of times and Gallagher and Hart.) Said Johnson was actually at 91-93 all inning, so apparently Johnson's arm isn't shot. Said he had a slider in the low 80's for strikes. I believe my friend got there for the second of a 2-inning outing by Johnson, I know the box score showed it as a 4-hit-3-run outing by Grant. Avery pitched the next inning, at 91-92 also with a low-80's breaking pitch. He thought Avery's breaking ball seemed to fool hitters better than Johnson's had. Roquet pitched the next inning and was 92-94, with what he referred to as a pretty good curve, and that he seemed to vary his fastball more, taking some off at 88-89. I know BA talked about Roquet having a slider; perhaps the fact that my friend called it more of a curve compared to Johnson's slider suggests that Roquet's has more break, I don't know.

Thanks, cal. Several thoughts for me: 1. I hadn't realized Harben was already derostered. 2. In my earlier post, Kroeger and long-shot Harvey were the only names that came to my mind. But Kevin Hart's outstanding start yesterday reminded me that he'd be a possible strong candidate as well. A third, oddly enough, would possibly be Justin Berg. Has the strong sinker, and I thought I'd read a report recently where he was at 95. Obviously not close to having the command, but he has made some progress. Sometimes Cubs protect guys like that.

Clevenger seems to be a genuine low-K contact line-drive guy. No K's, no HR's. This year he's pretty much not taken walks at all, either. My view on his future hinges on his defense. Yesterday or Saturday was his first game at daytona catching, after 10 as a 1B/DH. His boise time was split 50-50 between catching and 1B/DH. I would judge that as a DH/1B, the majors don't use too many no-HR guys. But if he could catch at a major-league level, I think their is excellent opportunity for a low-power high-average contact hitter, even if he doesn't walk or HR much. As a LH hitter, there is also obvious interest as a part-time player. But it really depends on the catching. If he's Fox-caliber catcher, not so bright future. If in time he can catch at a Koyie Hill level, I'd take him very seriously. The odds of that, probably, are slim, given that they DH/1B'd him 10 games before getting him in to catch for a game. If suddenly he was catching 3-4 days a week through August, I'd be really interested. I realize that he's barely 21, so some of those doubles might become HR's in time. But it doesn't appear that he's really going to be a HR hitter.