craig

yeah, overconfident, immature, reckless are all good words. It's a hard thing, for an overconfident guy who's been hyped up as a star, and then gets dominated. I agree, the ideal competitor figures something out and finds a way to get better, just like you said. Some of it was just reckless and, frankly, pretty dumb. How many times have we seen 1st-and-3rd, runner steals second, and the catcher fakes the throw? How may big-league baserunners are too dumb to recognize that? I assume it's happened before, but seeing PCA sprint towards the plate with the catcher holding the ball, you don't see such dumb/naive/reckless/immature stuff very often in mlb.

I think Hoyer viewed Rizzo's change as more than a change in approach, he said his swing was significantly changed. Your observation is that they built his swing such that it can't and probably never will be able to hit the middle/upper portions of the zone, especially velocity. As you imagine an optimistic future, would you be hoping that he can kinda be like Happ and be a .240's hitter someday, maybe with a few more speed-based infield hits to get him up into the .250's or .260's? Happ with more speed but without the walks? Happ kinda comes to mind as guy with trouble up in zone, who got sent down to Iowa for much of a year to work on that. Which moderated the problem, even though it's still never been a strength for him, just less awful. Maybe PCA as Happ without the walks could be a .730-.750 type guy OPS-wise? I saw some of the 19AB, and I admit I haven't seen a guy look so overmatched since DH replaced pitchers. He just looked like a very immature player who needs some more time; who needs some swing adjustment to allow more zone-coverage; and who needs some approach refinement. But yeah, my sense is that it's more than just approach-refinement.

On PCA, I didn't see all of his 19 AB, but I think listening to HOyer's post-season press conference influences my expectations. He said PCA's experience might be the best thing that happens for his career. Compared him to Happ, who'd gotten sent down to make adjustments such that he could be better able to handle upper-half strikes (Hoyer didn't spell it out like that, though). And compared him at some length especially to Rizzo. Talked about how Rizzo got dominated, realized that there were pitches his minor-league swing couldn't get to, and then made some pretty dramatic swing adjustments. My take is that Hoyer and Cubs recognize that there are pitches that PCA's current swing can't get to, and I'm guessing they have data on that from the minors as well, not just the 19AB. I think they think that he does need to make adjustments to be able to better cover the strike zone. So my guess is that they'll project for that adjustment practice to have every-day opportunity at Iowa. Signing Bellinger would make so much sense. Flexible for CF and 1B, so you get a stud in CF, without blocking PCA if/when he shows he's more ready. PCA starts at Iowa and works on things, and if he struggles its off screen. If no Bellinger, then it's tougher. If they come to camp with just Tauchman, PCA, and Canario as the three CF candidates, I don't think it will take much success for PCA to get a chance.

Ross didn't trust Little last September in game situations unless as a last resort, and he was kinda off-and-on in terms of being able to throw strikes. I think for guys like this, Hoyer will try to go with more experienced guys. My expectation is that he'll add one veteran lefty on guaranteed deal; certain to make the roster, even if perhaps he pitches his way off of it later. Come to camp with guaranteed new lefty; guaranteed Smyly; and Hughes. Little is 4th man coming in, destined for Iowa unless Hughes is bad, or Little is both throwing strikes every opportunity and showing professionalism/confidence/composure. The starting pen is never the ending pen. Injuries, new vet might be bad, Smyly might be bad, Hughes might never be the 2022 version again. Smyly or new vet might get traded at deadline, Who knows? Don't know how the season will roll. I think the burden is on Little to show enough consistency and control so that they want him up, and so that the next time a window opens, they give the opportunity to him rather than looking to somebody else or going outside. Or, maybe thy don't actually sign a guaranteed outside vet? Is Hoyer ready to jump the lux line, and if so by so much that he can't trade his way back under if the season is failing? Is there a lefty that they like whose cost is not prohibitive? Maybe there just isn't a guy their scouting likes that much, so instead they'll bring in only some rehab non-roster guy, and only Smyly and Hughes (and Leiter) will be ahead of Little on the lefty ladder? If it's just Leiter, Hughes, Smyly, and non-roster flyers, I'd still expect Hughes to win all ties. But Little might certainly have a chance to beat out Hughes in camp.

Injury, camp performance, and the cost of relief guys in trade or free agency can dictate things. But I totally don't expect Little to make the opening roster. He's got years of options left, and his command and consistency are unreliable. I totally expect that he will start at Iowa, have opportunity to improve and get more consistent, and wait for opportunity and need. Think that will be the setup for a lot of our prospects. Interesting, has a chance to be good, hope he earns it, etc.. But I imagine Little, along with PCA and Canario and probably Palencia, those guys will all start at Iowa. Prove they are ready there, and wait for injury or failure to open their next windows of opportunity.

His long-term future, if any, will be as a reliever. How long he gets rotation starts is hard to guess. Depends on other guys worthy of starts; on how wild he is; and on how his pitch distribution is looking. If it's obvious that he's wildman-challenged to have even two pitches that he can throw for strikes, Cubs may not spend a lot of time starting him and working on 3rd and 4th pitches. Trade value, of course, is better for a guy having rotation success. And getting more innings is helpful, too. Obviously would love to see him throwing enough strikes with enough consistency that he'd have possibilities as a rotation guy. Who knows whether he'll develop and gain consistency.

Alcantara up to .257.

I question both, and think the answers determine where his career might go. Triantos hit only 4 HR this season. Imperfect analogy, but suppose Triantos hits like Hoerner? 9HR-Hoerner had a .729 OPS, good for a defensive asset. But Triantos is not going to be asset 2B or 3B. Put a Hoerner-like bat in left field or DH, and you've got 4A. The difference between a 9-HR and 19-HR guy can be pretty big, *IF* the extra HR's don't come at cost. If instead of going 3/10 on BIP those 10 balls go over the wall, that adds like 14 points to OBP, and over 70 points to OPS. Add 70+ points to .729 OPS guy, and suddenly he's an asset DH or LF. Or, .800-OPS guy might start at 3B or 2B even if his defense is modestly below-average. So, I think developing combined raw power and swing path to get to 15+ HR's is a really big deal for Triantos. HR's is more than a function of raw power. Good hitters who can hit the ball square pretty often have a big advantage. If Triantos's blend of swing-path/raw-power was league average, then he might hypothetically have above-average HR rate, based on barreling the ball at above-average rate?

Jose Romero, what do we know? He's short, he isn't young (22), he's K'd a lot of guys in low minors. Any stuff that's worth tracking, or just a roster-filler?

Anybody watching any South Bend games with any perspective on his catching? Show-stopper bad, so that if he has a major-league career, it's DH or nothing? Or is his catching perhaps decent enough so that *IF* he works at it and improves, he might have a shot to be usable as a big-league catcher? It's obviously the career hinge. 3 options: DH only. Could improve enough to become a possibility even as a primary catcher. Might improve enough to be accepted as a #2 catcher, but can never be a primary guy. It may be too soon to tell. Sometimes catcher defense improves a lot with time and work. And sometimes opinions vary a lot, might get different scouts who project his future defense very differently.

I could imagine him getting used kinda like Wicks this year. Wicks got 91 innings in the minors. 6-day rotation when resting him the least. Limited innings-per-start. A couple of starts skipped, July 12 and July 29. By August they extended his rest, with 6, 7, and 9 day starts in August. It's possible that Horton might actually be allowed a few more innings next summer than Wicks was this summer, just because Wicks is more nibbly? Horton might hypothetically throw the same number of pitches, but get 100 innings where Wicks got 91?

Wild has been the norm, not the recent exception. Counting the HBP in addition to the BB, he's 37 wildman/59IP on the season. More baserunners via wildman than via hits (37 wildman/34 hits/59IP). That's 6 wildman/9IP for the season. Wildman/inning: May: 5/11 June: 11/9 July: 7/11 August: 14/19 Seems pretty evident that wildman is a hinge on which his career will swing. Sometimes guys get better, and hopefully he'l be one of them.. Lots of guys don't.

Thanks, Tiger, for confirm on Little back-to-back. Very interesting! Pretty obviously reflects perspective transition from D+D to application.

milb box scores shows Luke Little having pitched 0.2 yesterday. Was that true, or was it actually Brendan Little or somebody else? I'm curious because if true, that's the first back-to-back of his career, a career in which only once before has he pitched with less than two days of rest between appearances. One of the challenges with minor league pitchers transitioning to the majors is that minor league starters work 6 day rotations instead of 5, and relievers work on 3 or 4-day rotation instead of every-other or back-to-back that big-leaguers throw. Obviously few minor-league relief callups get used in high-leverage spots, though. So on a good team, some new un-trusted back-of-pen callup isn't going to be asked for much back-to-back or every-other-day usage.

I don't get the "inconsistent standards" complaint! What no-position prospects are ranked in the org's top 10? PCA, Alcantara, Shaw, all are perceived as position-capable by people who top-10 them. And I imagine people who top-10 Caissie do that with the perception that he can play RF/LF. So where's the inconsistency of standards? Nobody is ranking McGeary top 10.

No knock on Murray. But 20th in HR's, 7th in slugging, batting in the .260's, having an .865 OPS, those are good but not "wow" offensive numbers. Not "next-great-DH" numbers for a 23-year-old. He may project to add significantly more power, I don't know? As you've noted his baseball experience may not match his age, so hopefully he's got a lot more improvement ahead. I'm guessing that physically, he probably doesn't have a lot of "when he fills out he'll add more power" projection left?

Murray's not going to get top-10'd as a 5'10" defensive 1B, that's all I'm saying. Your question was what he needs to do to get discussed among the top-10 guys. The answer is to emerge as a guy with starter-caliber 3B-defense. It's not complicated. Cubs have a good and a deep system. Guys who aren't top-10 will have successful careers, and outperform guys who rated higher. The "top-10-or-not" issue doesn't matter to me.

Tom, I'm the one obsessed with 1B defense, I often think that's almost the most impactful defensive position on the field given how many plays they're involved. After seeing Bellinger there, I'm reminded often of how great it is to have his range on all the throws. I'd never want a Donovan Solano playing 1B for my team. I can't speak for others, but for me the capacity to play a spot defensively applies to anybody who's in or near my top-10. It's one (among other) reasons why I think it's ludicrous for anybody to include Triantos in their top-10's. At present, he projects as a liabilility at any defensive spot. It's certainly a question with Caissie, too. He's got a rocket in RF, but I don't get the sense his range is good, and guys don't normally get rangier as they add years. So, *IF* he really shakes out as DH-only, is Caissie's bat THAT good? (With his power potential, it might be; but it's a pretty high bar. And with all his K's, it's tough.). Ballesteros, likewise. Can he actually catch? If so, I love him as a prospect. But if he can't, I can't put him in a top 10. He's even shorter than Murray, no way I want Ballesteros playing 1B more than on a once-in-a-while contingency basis.

As Tim and mogrified mentioned, the 3B defense is the path. When he improves himself so that people perceive him as a capable every-day big-league 3B defender, people will include him in top-10 discussion. A short 5'10" guy has no wing-span at 1B, so 1B is no path. If he never surpasses liability-emergency capacity at 3B and 1B, top 10 isn't appropriate.

Nice for Brennen. Probably been a couple of years since a 3-hit game, or one with two XBH.

Prospect Promotion Incentive, two articles. The top link is much more detailed and useful, the bottom one is shallow and misleading. Wanted to post a topic on this just for future reference, since it's hard to remember the details. https://www.sportingnews.com/us/mlb/news/mlb-prospect-promotion-incentive-rookie-year-cba/ja5ts8eaxcuv85xujnzriafb https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/33761266/the-end-mlb-service-manipulation-how-kris-bryant-paved-way-next-kris-bryant It's ironic that the requirement is for prospect to be top-100 on 2/3 of MLB.com, espn, or BA prospect lists. Given how we don't necessarily respect BA's list as much as other lists. The sportingnews author says ROY 2 + 3 can win draft picks in the international draft, which of course never happened. To your knowledge, is there perhaps a spending allotment instead? I assume not, and that there is no reward for 2nd/3rd in ROY with no international draft in place. Don't think this is Cub-relevant for this year or next. Doubt either PCA or Horton will either win ROY or make opening roster or get full-season service time. Same for Shaw, who isn't currently on 2/3 of those three top-100 lists. (Although he may well be after the season wraps.)

The negotiation leverage for future draft agents is a great point. Hadn't considered that.

From economics standpoint, I think hustling guys up quickly is of dubious value. Six years till free agency, I don't want to waste the first year and two on development. I'd prefer as much development to for free in the minors, then get as much real big-league value as possible during the cheap and club-controlled years. Thus, I'm in no rush to call up Brown, Horton, PCA, Wicks, Shaw economics-wise. *If* there is hypothetically still development to be gained in the minors, it's economically advantageous to get them as fully-developed as possible before calling them up. Obviously economics is one thing, winning is another. Years-distant budget considerations are routinely outweighed by Nowacrate W-L considerations.

Neto, by the way, has a .315 OBP and .411 slugging. [His OBP isn't worse because he gets HBP a lot. He's got more HBP than walks, enabling the >.300 OBP with only a .241 BA.] Perhaps that's just the developmental beginning, and he's going to improve in future. Being 96 OPS+ as a rookie is a pretty good way to start a career, and he may get better and better. But, I also wonder whether he may not perhaps already be near his ceiling? And maybe won't get very much better than he already is? Not trying to criticize him. But if the Angels hypothetically get future what they've already got now, a kinda average guy might not be all that exciting long-term. Even if they got anti-awful from Neto very quickly.

We're a farm-loving group. But I admit I've never really understood the resentment over removing the Northwest League. Compressing from 7 to 6 levels doesn't look like that slippery of a slope to me. The goal is player development, and I think that is better served in Mesa with all of its facilities and volume of coaches and pitch-lab and weight-room resources, etc., rather than sending some up to Eugene and its long bus rides. That was the perception of the player-development people more than finances. The cost factor for Eugene was a drop in the bucket relative to Cub expenses. There have always been occasional guys who fast-tracked it to the majors. Neto and Schanuel, Hoerner and Schwarber. There was a pitcher named Burt Hooton who the Cubs drafted and brought to the majors without a single minor-league appearance back in the 70's. I suspect that college is better at player-development now than in years past. The usage of analytics is advanced. So maybe some guys will reach their peaks more quickly. But minor league baseball and player development have plenty of future.