craig

That's a LOT of missing names. I wonder how many are injured, versus slow ramp-up, versus just not considered developmentally ready for full-season ball? It may be that with the renewed emphasis on velocity, that injuries will proliferate accordingly? Or I wonder if having guys hands-on in camp, that pitch-lab guys who are reconfiguring some of their pitches, that they've decided extra time with coaches in camp is developmentally more valuable than facing full-season batters? Would be a good question for Dorey or Cubs exec on case by case:

Thanks. Sanders had a good season two summers back, but he's always been super wild. Will be interesting to see how his command and control hold up.

Assuming there is just camp ball, instrux, but no Az League games this summer, we'll need to count on Az Phil to give us some notes on the developmental guys. Ben Rodriguez, Montero, DJ, Schlafer, we're not going to get any box-score games for those guys. Pretty much depending on instrux-type feedback from Az Phil to get any buzz on those guys.

I heard them mention a 99 for Megill.

The "middle-of-the-order bat, with potential power" line was interesting. I've thought of him as a potential pure hitter who hopefully has enough power to be OK. Or whose HR/doubles production might be more decent than his BP-power might anticipate, just because he hits the ball square more often than guys with light-tower BP power who rarely get to that in games. But to have one or two of Law's scouting friends say they think he might have middle-of-the-order power, based on some instrux BP and a couple of games, suggests that maybe even his raw BP power potential looks decent.

I'm glad to hear some scouting-community consensus that Pinango has a chance to be good. I infer that based on camp or video glimpses, or just on 2nd-hand from Cubs personnel or from scouts, that media people perceive Pinango to have some potential to hit with some adequate power. Given how hard hitting is, I'll take any possibility of a true-blue hitter that we can find, if he's got at least a chance to be OK power-wise.

Dorey reported that he's gotten stronger. Can't hit HR without some strength, but can't hit HR's without hitting the ball, either. Obviously he'll need to hit more than the 3HR he hit at South Bend in 2019. They're all snowflakes, I get that. But I wonder if Bote doesn't give some analogy? In his age 21-22-23 seasons in the minors, he hit 4, 6, and 7 HR. Now we know he's got plenty of power.

I just listened during lunch to your Herz interview. Hadn't seen it previously. That was really good. Thanks! Are you going to post the Basham interview?

Thanks, I'll look forward to the article. *I assume the trick for him, really, is going to be consistent-enough ability to repeat delivery and locate strikes. *A lot of the media scouting, I think, tends to instinctively project hard-throwing power guys with some sharp stuff, but with control challenges, as ultimately becoming bullpen guys. There is good reason for that, I totally get it. *But I'd like to hope that some of the Cubs bigger arms will be able to cobble together enough control/command/consistency to become 150-inning starting pitchers, not all 60-inning relievers. Brailyn, Jensen, McAvene, Riley Thompson, Alzolay too, all of those good-arm guys have some control questions, and I think media rankings tend to profile most, perhaps all of them, kinda in the bullpen direction. Or at least have enough doubts about their capacity to throw rotation strikes to downgrade their rankings accordingly. Clarke has also been kinda projected as relief, since that's what he did in college, and since pre-Covid was only recognized as being a 2-pitch guy. Other than the Abbott/Keegan types, Kohl Franklin and Gallardo seem to be the only guys who are consistently projected as as starter profiles, and obviously Gallardo is projected as lacking the power velo or spins to project as a high-end guy. My interest for now would be primarily in pitchers. Pitchers can do stuff in pitch-lab through Covid, and work on specific pitches. Not sure what hitters can actually say they've been working on, without live pitching to have faced. I'd be interested in: 1. Matt Dorey, and then ask him mostly about guys outside of the more talked-about top-10. IN one of his radio interviews, Dorey was very willing to talk about specific players, if only the interviewer asked; but naturally the interviewer rarely went outside the top ten. So I'd love to hear his comments on McAvene, Clarke, Burgmann, Cam Sanders, Ethan Roberts, Gallardo, Herz, Schlaffer, Estrada, Cruz, Gallardo, Ben Rodriguez, Manny Rodriguez. The other more vague question I'd be interested in asking him is, "My readers have an understanding of how pitch-lab resources can help to optimize arm slot, grip, spin, and pitch shape. But can you explain how you and the pitch-lab can help guys whose stuff and spin is excellent when they are on, but where control and consistency is really the bigger challenge?" 2. Most of those I'd be interested in contacts. But I imagine some of those might be easier to have intereviews with guys who have pitches a little bit more. So some of the more college-y guys like Clarke, Burgmann, Sanders, and Roberts. 3. Schlaffer I think would be an interesting one. Being a Chicago-area kid, I'd think he might be a fun and interesting interview and article. Longenhagen referred to him as having "great arm speed", and being lanky and projectable, but with a kinda violent delivery back in HS, and already getting up to mid-90's just before the draft, and 93-95 the one inning in summer that Eric saw him. I think he'd be a really interesting guy to talk to. "How much good muscle do you think you've added since HS?" "there were reports of some mid-90's back in draft spring/summer; is that true? If so, are you able to do that a little more consistently, or with better control now? Or maybe you've added a little bit more since then?" "There were reports that you had maybe some violence in your delivery back in your draft spring/summer. Have you and the Cubs modified your delivery very much over the last 18 months, and if so how has that maybe helped your control or the movement on your pitches?" Those might be some of the types of questions I'd be curious about." 4. I'm quite curious about Cam Sanders. He seems kinda Maples-esque in being on the far-extreme of wild. As a college sophomore, he walked 50 guys in 44 innings. He had a 2.94 ERA at South Bend, really good. At South Bend in 19, his BB/9 was 4.72, bad by any standards, but his first time under 5.7 BB/9 at any level. He also had piles of wild pitches and hit batters, so even with the walk reduction, he's still pretty obviously on the extreme control-challenged end of the wildman spectrum. He had some flukey profile at South Bend, the high walks and surprisingly quite a few HR's, and not all that many K's either, but low hits allowed. Anyway, I get the sense that he's got some good velo and excellent stuff, I'm guessing a lot of natural movement on his fastball probably accounts for why throwing strikes is so hard for him, but also why hard contact is kinda hard against him, too. Anyway, I'd love to have an interview with him. "Obviously you've got some big-league stuff and movement. Are there things you and the pitch lab have done to try to increase your consistency? Any little cues or triggers to keep your delivery locked in? Do you throw both 4-seam and 2-seam fastball? If so, how much velocity difference do they have? Do you find one a little easier to control?" I guess I'm really interested in him and McAvene because they entered the system on the variably wild end, Cam particularly. We all get that pitch lab stuff can help adjust grips and spins and stuff. But I'm not sure I get how much, or how, it can developmentally or mechanically help to reduce wildness. So anybody who might be able to speak into that part of the developmental equation, I think would be fun.

Hey, that's cool! I hadn't realized that either! Very nice. I've enjoyed your articles and insights from coaches and players. Nice. I'm guessing you maybe talked about McAvene with Basham? Thanks for info here. Heh heh, I was hoping to get some more insights on specific guys! Maybe articles to be written later? :):):). Any other scoop on McAvene you might want to share? Did you get any insights from him on Clarke? He had some really nice numbers in brief Eugene debut, but with a glimpse of a perhaps very different profile. I've gotten the sense that Dorey thinks Clarke has a chance to be good, but scouting comments are rare and may not reflect what he throws now. Pre-draft, pretty much large man with a curve. But an update on what he is throwing now would be interesting. Is he a big curve, slow curve, spike curve, or several variants? Fastball 2 seam, 4-seam, or both? An additional pitch he's added to support starting-rotation profile? I just don't know much. Or whether he's strictly a reliever, or has perhaps the control to be a rotation candidate? And then there's the never mention 5th-rounder Burgmann. Longenhagen had him top-40 last June, ahead of guys like Steele, Clarke, Herz, and Little. Made reference to him throwing 95 and having touched 97. I suspect some of Longenhagen's observations were impacted by seeing some guys last spring; and perhaps not having seen others. (So maybe he saw Burgmann and liked what he saw; but didn't actually see Herz or Clarke throw?).

Nice concise way. Exactly. Exactly. I'm kinda figuring there should be capacity to add one big-ticket rotation starter. And I'm hoping they'd have capacity to sign four variably big-ticket hitters, basically one more than what we've got now. -*IF* Bryant, Baez, and Rizzo take up 3 of those 4 contracts, there might still be space to add one more. -And for each of those three who doesn't come back, that just frees up cash to sign somebody else good from outside.

It would sure be fun if the rotation prospects had good years, and if we went into next winter feeling like we had a flock of options, both for highish-end guys, but also as 6th-7th-8th guys who can come up at any time, and actually have a chance to be good. An ideal: Hendricks Alzolay Davies => big-ticket big-stud FA Arrieta => Brailyn. Brailyn has a successful season, and we are happy to plan him in as a high-ceiling stud prospect. Williams => System guy from the pool. The pool could include Williams himself, Mills, Jensen, Abbott, RThompson, KThompson, Miller, etc. Obviously the preferred would be for Alzolay to look good, and for Brailyn and Jensen to BOTH look like high-ceiling stud starters. But I think it would be super nice to have a stockpile of options guys who aren't fringy talents, but who are legit talents; who we'd be more than comfortable using to support pennant runs; who would have high trade-value to other teams looking for good young pitching; etc. But I kinda want a good collection, so that Hoyer can feel comfortable going after a single high-end star FA pitcher, and figure our prospects can fill out the rest. And perhaps still have moneys shifting from pitching to position players.

The author asked Basham if Jensen's new curve was a spike. Basham kinda said yes, but said that jensen throws everything with so much power that distinguishing spike from normal curve may not be relevant. Either way, it sounds like it's got the hard movement. (And perhaps with that the challenge in throwing it for strikes, I imagine. but that's just me worrying. I like the idea of a control+smarts pitcher perhaps showing up with perhaps legit stuff.

https://ivyfutures.com/2021/02/23/quick-hits-with-bobby-basham-cubs-director-of-player-development/ Really nice. Some comments on Keegan T, I don't think I've often heard Cubs talk about him. Basham says his slider/cutter and curve have all added power. I am very interested. Comments on Jensen, he says the new curve can be called a spike curve. Also comments on how nasty and how much movement his 2-seam fastball gets. Some supporting comments on Andy Weber

Just looked at standings for 2019, South Bend played 135 games, Smokies 139. So 120 games isn't bad at all.

Benjamin Rodriguez, says "from being in little league together to being teammates". Is this a different Benjamin Rodriguez from the velocity pitcher? The pitcher is 21, Cristian is supposed to be 16. Does "from being in little league together to being teammates" make sense if this is pitcher Rodriguez and these guys are 4 years different? Or is there some Age-Gate stuff going on, or what? Heh heh, it's not like I was exactly best buds and in little league together with boys 3-5 years younger or older than me, even if I knew all of my four brothers friends and teammates.

Heh heh, "I'll lean to one of the older prospects of the bunch", so he chooses 17-year-old Preciado. :):)

Remind me. He's the older OK State guy, who had surgery? Kind of a college Maples, with a strong/fast arm and a lot of K's, but kind of a walk-an-inning guy? I'm sure I'm oversimplifying, but in my head I'm recalling him kind of as a 2K/1BB-per-inning type of wildman profile, right? Kind of an interesting wildcard, I'd think. As a relief guy who was a freshman, then coming back as a rehab guy, and then Covid-shortened, he'll turn 24 early summer, but only pitched 72 college innings combined. So probably with so little actual game pitching, and much of that in kind of rehab post-op mode, it's not entirely clear that what he's been past represents what he might be future. I'm fired up about the pitch-lab stuff and the optimism that they can develop pitch shape etc. But I admit I'm really curious and a little less confident about how much pitch-lab development will be able to help the wildman. Adjusting grips and delivery for better velocity and better pitch shape, that make sense. But does the pitch-lab have capacity to help wildman gain control? If so, how would that work? Heh heh, in chemistry research, we do proof-of-principle experiments, and if a new procedure works well for a case-study, scope-and-limitation studies follow. I'm kinda thinking that *if* there is proof-of-principle that pitch-lab-can help command, a guy like Leeper might be on the extreme-challenge end of the scope-and-limitation continuum for control-repair.

In terms of future ranking, probably Brailyn, Alzolay, and Abbott (and Steele) are about the only guys on our top 40 who are likely to graduate, right? Maybe Amaya. The huge preponderance of our current top-40 will still be available for next year's lists. It would be kinda awesome if in a single season Brailyn, Alzolay, and Abbott all graduated and became valid mlb rotation starters. That would be pretty good production from a #27 system!

Yeah, I think the BA rank is probably closer. But, who knows, really? Every organization has guys who worked out last year, and worked on new pitches, and young hitters who added muscle. It may turn out that once games start, Brailyn and Jensen and McAvene and Burl are wildmen. To some degree I think Brailyn is kind of a ranking swing man. I assume Law views him as a wildman reliever. BA values him more highly, and thinks his chance to make it as a good rotation guy is real. Likewise BA has kind of bought into Alzolay with the slider as a plus-stuff guy with a chance to be a perfectly good #3. How those two pitchers play out will largely determine what kind of pre-season ranking was more wise. That said, by next year, probably both will have graduated; or if Brailyn hasn't pitched well enough to graduate, he will probably not be earning great ranking love.

Benjamin Rodriguez. Video showed him throwing 98.

Thanks, Tom. Really fun and helpful just to get a glimpse at those two guys. Seeing the frames move during a swing is helpful to just create a picture, rather than the still shots or face shots or sitting at a desk signing a contract shots. yeah, Quintero's bat seems quick. Hope he can actually see the ball and hit the ball. Getting a glimpse of Ballasteros is more surprising. That's one big barrel-chested guy, wow. I can't ever remember the Cubs adding a guy built like that as a teenager. Probably Schwarber is maybe the only big-dollar guy I can ever remember with a frame like that, for a position guy. Well, I guess now 3rd-round Nwogu, too? I kinda love it. You don't spend big money on a physique like that thinking he can play almost any position on the field. You'd only pay big if you really think he can be a big-bat, and/or has a really good chance to make it as a catcher. If he doesn't make it at catcher, probably 1B or DH are the only fallbacks, where you'd really need to hit. So I'm kinda deducing from the physique that they REALLY love his bat potential, and are pretty optimistic about catching, too. Indeed, the international guy described him as a bat-first guy, and that they hadn't seen a bad AB from him. (Not sure how many they could have ever seen, grant you....). So I kinda like the idea of getting a big, strong, hit-first guy with middle-of-the-order possibilities. I also like the look of that single swing. We see so many Cub hitters who seem to have been scouted and built for a 2-seam keep-the-ball-down world, but end up ill-suited to 4-seam high-fastball world. On that single swing Ballasteros looks like he might perhaps have the bat placement and balance to get a level swing on chest-high stuff, and perhaps the barrel-chested strength to drive some upper-half pitches a long way? Heh heh, I know, we can like totally deduce so much from a single pictured swing a guy had at age 15 against a batting-practice pitch! :):)

I just don't hear that at all in the interview... I re-listened, and you may be right here, Tom. I may have just been reading things in that weren't really there. Dorsey said there were really focusing on the curveball and talked about that most; said previously was mostly two-pitch fastball/slider, with some change in college that he didn't throw much.

Yeah, in some years past I used to view 2B as a place with LOTS of really good hitters. Not so many now, it seems. Would be super fun to develop a guy there who could really hit.

Tom, good points that the interviewer has audience other than prospect-following fans like us in mind. [i admit I find endless stories about Theo-for-commissioner, how-awesome-was-Theo, how-smart-is-Breslow, and Covid-disrupted-what-we-do to be kinda redundant and boring; but maybe the larger audience has more appetite for those than I do.] I don't imagine that Dorey or the organization has much close-to-the-chest, keep-it-secret stuff in terms of hyping their prospects. Dorey was more than willing to discuss whomever came up, whether Nwogu or Weber or Riley or whomever. So I suspect he'd have been fine to share some pitch discussion and he's-working-on-XYZ if the discussion had turned to McAvene or Clark or Gallardo or whomever. The interview just didn't flow that way. I kinda suspect having discussed Jensen and Franklin, that Dorey was just about ready to discuss some other pitchers when interviewer kind of cut him off and redirected to his SS-is-the-flavor-of-the-month thing. On Jensen, Dorey was pretty enthusiastic, was the first "breakout" name, and talked about his stuff being explosive, really athletic guy, etc.. I do get the 5-pitch thing. But Dorey kinda talked as if Jensen was a 2-pitch fastball/slider guy who needed a 3rd pitch, thus the focus on trying to develop the curve. Maybe he's just using broadly using "fastball" to encompass both high-fastball and low-fastball 4-/2-seam variants. Right after mentioning the 2-pitch-needs-a-3rd thing, he almost caught himself to acknowledge that Jensen had tinkered with the change in college, but hardly used it. I kinda got the impression that he views the change as a token pitch that, at least for now, doesn't look like a useful part of his arsenal? He didn't say that, I'm just inferring from how he talked. I's also possible that the change will be an area of focus later, but isn't right now? In mentioning the need-for and efforts-on 3rd-pitch, the curveball, he curiously mentioned that as a pitch he could throw for strikes, before mentioning the change that he'd used a little bit in college. I'm just speculating, but I suspect they are having him work on curve more than change because they think his change did NOT look like a pitch he'd be able to throw for strikes very often, and that the curve had a better chance for that? Perhaps in time the change will be used at times, but perhaps more as a chase-pitch than a pitch that can be thrown for strikes reasonably often? I still think it was weird/dumb that they didn't bring Jensen to South Bend to work with him there. If he's working on grips and change and curve and stuff, I'd like to hope the Cubs coaches would have been helpful in supporting that. O well. Still, this may be a guy who still has a fair bit of learning, discovery, and development ahead for him. Maybe now the focus will be curve. Maybe in a year or two he'll invest time in something else in the changeup world, maybe even the one-seam like Abbott? Maybe at a different point he'll decide that maybe some cutter action will complement his other stuff, who knows. But I'm guessing there may be a few chapters left in his developmental story.