craig

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.

That Dorey interview was really, really good. And CubsWin gave a terrific recap of it. Couple add-ons: In mentioned Riley Thompson as the second breakout-candidate pitcher beside Jensen, he mentioned being really fast, I think his wording was tickling triple digits. pre-draft, BA reports had talked about high-end velocity. But I thought in his pro reports from both 18 and 19, that there really wasn't mention of being exceptionally fast, and reports were more low-90's touching 95. *IF* he's really very fast and approaching 100, that's maybe a different story. Particularly for a guy where the fastball is his 2nd pitch. Dorey mentioned that his curve is really good, one of the best in the system, that his changeup is developing or improving or some wording like that, and made reference to developing a cutter. I'm a big cutter fan, and think it often adds a pitch that guys can throw for strikes to different parts of the zone. So I thought that report was pretty interesting. As CW and Tom have mentioned, had some really positive excitement about Jensen, great athlete, explosive stuff. But while he may end up using 5 pitches as Tom is hoping, that wasn't quite the story that Dorey was spinning. He referred to jensen as having been mostly a 2-pitch guy, who also used the change some in college but not a lot; and referred to the curve as a 3rd pitch (not a 5th). Oddly, he made some reference to the curve for Jensen as a pitch he could throw for a strike. I found that curious, since for most pitchers the curve is a very difficult pitch to throw for strikes, and I rarely think of pitchers with control issues looking to add a curveball as a strike pitch. Hope it works. In mentioning Andy Weber as one of the two offensive breakout candidates (with Strumpf), he mentioned Weber having gotten a lot stronger, more physical, and was really driving the ball. That's interesting. He was only 20 and pretty slim when he was drafted; in 2019 he hit 8 HR, but he had 43 other XBH. So he wasn't a singles guy; *if* he's bigger/stronger and some of those doubles become HR's, he could become a different prospect if he ends up with decent HR production. I thought the positivity about Abbott was pretty interesting, reference to transformation as a pitcher; reference to developing the 1-seam fastball to go with his two above-average breaking pitches and his riding fastball. He talked about his riding fastball, and then I thought tossed in the word cutter; I wasn't sure if he was saying he has a riding 4-seamer, AND a cutter, and the two above-average breaking balls, and now the 1-seam changeup, to make him a 5-pitch guy? Or whether he was actually suggesting that his riding fastball is actually a cutter? I don't normally think of guys using cutters at the top of the zone. Talked about his being really athletic, and really competitive, and "killing it" in Mesa, in addition to being in really great shape. And tons of strikes. Very curious to see what he can do. With six years of club control in front of him, *if* Abbott could emerge as capable rotation guy, even if not great, that would be fun to eat up one of the rotation spots, and to free up budget for other targets. Dorey had "sky's the limit" for Franklin, with his projection on his fastball, comment that he can throw strikes, mentioned his curve having really good spin, and of course his changeup has always gotten good reports as being a plus pitch and one of the best changeups in the system, not counting Hendricks. I wish the interviewer wouldn't have changed subjects or directed the interview in non-player directions. Dorey was willingly talking details about prospects, but interviewer detoured him to Brewslow direction, and detoured him to talking about Theo. Would have loved to have asked him another 5-10 minutes to talk about other pitchers who might be emerging or might be guys we'll be talking about a year from now. Would have loved to let him discuss Clark, Herz, McAvene, Schlafer, Roberts, Gallardo, Cruz, Rodriguez, Fenter, Rodriguez, Thompson, Burgman, Bigge, Patterson, or whomever. Dorey might have willingly gone that direction if either allowed or given any kind of little nudge, he was more than willing to talk about anybody. I'd just love to have a prospect interview with him that talked about nothing but players, and didn't spend any time on the familiar top-10.

Thanks for link, Tom! Great interview, really interesting, really good. That and Dorey interview, two terrific interviews in two days. Fun.

Great stuff, cal, thanks. Here's a link trying to capture that interview: https://www.cubsinsider.com/2021/01/23/cubs-international-director-louie-eljaua-dishes-on-newest-international-free-agent-class/ Anybody have a link to the interview itself? I couldn't find one. Ferrera as a Mondesi-type with big exit-velocities is fun. Ballasteros with 1.85-1.95 pop-times is fun, too. The CubsInsider link has a picture of Hernandez from the back; hard to tell with a fuzzy in-swing photo, but he looks more broad-shouldered than I'd expected.

Agree with most of your takes, Tom, a lot mirror some of my thoughts too. 1. Particularly the note that some think Jensen might end up with decent/good control. 2. Agree that Presciado doesn't need to be a SS to be really good; *if* he ends up being a really good hitter with really good power. 3. I'm much more interested in the positive Franklin talk. Glaser talked to a bunch of Cubs people, who have access to his throwing over the last year. Whatever Glaser's articulation of why, it sounds like Cubs people fairly consistently view him as being at that 6-7 level on par overall with jensen. Which I take as pretty exciting. You may have different boxes, but it seems they believe his curve is good. So, the spin is that his control is good; his velocity and fastball spin is good and projects to get better; that his curve is good; and his change is really good; and his work ethic is good. I imagine between any two scouts, their relative ranking of Frankling/Jensen probably hinges on whether they see Jensen checking enough rotation boxes. A scout who thinks he's too small, that his control is more on the fringe-average side and will involve high pitches-per-inning, I assume those scouts will place him behind Franklin. And if you project his control as good, then rotation innings are more accessible. 4. With the Padres guys, they suggested that as good as Presciado seems to be, that different people don't necessarily see a lot of separation. Suggested that some people maybe had Mena ahead of Presciado, and somebody had Santana ahead of both. Optimist says that's because all four might be legit 1st-round-level talents. The best is really good, but the others are so good too that you can't separate much. Pessimist is that none are really all THAT good, more like four 2nd-round guys. Obviously the observation is really limited, so expecting observers to have enough views to rank them accurately is unrealistic. And even for Padres people who have observed, that's still limited observation on the past; how they will develop future, is uncertain projection for anybody. 5. Tom, the other "take" for me was on Howard, and was NOT as positive as yours. He said from people he's talked to, some projected a .240 8-HR type hitter; and the high-end projection was .260 15HR kind of hitting. I admit for a HS 1st-rounder, I'd like to think the ceiling would be a little higher than .260-15HR? Those brackets kind of feel like Addision-Russell-with-less-power on the low end and Jason-Heyward-with-less-walks on the high end. Not quite as optimistic as I'd expected. Again, the player is perhaps too young and the views too few for any of those projections to merit any confidence. But yeah, from the scouting this doesn't seem to project as an asset middle-of-the-lineup bat, more a good-defense guys who'd be #6 hitter, perhaps a #7 on a really good team.

Thanks, Bertz. Questions about that: 1. How does that factor into splits? Not sure whether data supports is, but I think a presupposition in past was that lower arm slot might make a guy more vulnerable to opposite hitters? 2. I wonder on control? Wouldn't a more side-arm guy be more likely to have greater horizontal variance relative to an over-the-top, who might be more likely to have greater vertical variance? Or overall no correlation between command/control and arm slot? Will be interesting to see what Patterson looks like this summer. He was a crazy fun story in 19, but the age, history, draft spot, and velocity didn't reinforce going crazy confident that he'll end up being a good major leaguer. He'd be another fun success story. Cubs have at least 5 prospect pitchers of some interest who will all turn 26 this summer: From oldest to youngest: Thompson (March) Steele, Miller (July) Patterson (August) Abbot (September)

Jensen is obviously a huge swing guy for the organization. People often talk about leadership and philosophy and process, for good reason. But you really build a winning roster one player at a time. A 5-man rotation, each time you fill a spot with an asset guy, particularly initially cheap and with years of club control, that's a huge step towards building a winner. Jensen has the arm and stuff to possibly provide that, and it would be huge if he succeeds. Work in progress for sure. But yeah, the ability to command his stuff, consistently, is the hinge. Would be so fun and valuable if he turns out to be a success guy.

I've very enthused and curious to see what the can do. Still, not to be a downer, but every pitcher in pro has experiments and tried lots of pitches. Every minor-league rotation guy does that. Whether Jensen will be able to throw all those pitches for strikes, that's the question, and obviously those who actually can are the exception, not the norm. Scouting reports on Jensen never seem very optimistic about his control potential, much less command. But I admit wondering and hoping anyway? If I'm a smart scout, I'm not giving 1st-round recommendations on a guy who I don't think has a chance to control it pretty well. I've got to assume if the Cubs claim to be excited about the slider/curve progress, obviously some of that is spin and such, but I'd think some might be that he's showing an ability to repeat and throw those pitches for strikes or close.

Thanks, interesting. There's Steele mentioned again, and Fenter. Thompson not mentioned. Hottovy also mentioned Underwood as a possibility, given his former history in rotation. I think he'd be an interesting one, since I think his stuff and usage has probably shifted some since last in rotation. Hard to envision his consistency or command holding up well, though, but who knows. I wonder about the "multi-IP relievers" bit, how important that actually is, for all the talk they give it. That was talk last summer, too; but when the season actually played, how often did Ross use guys for 2 innings, and did he ever use a reliever for 3 or 4? I guess 2 innings is "multi-IP", so for sure you do want that. But I'd not think getting stretched out to accommodate 2-inning usage would be really all that hard. I suppose it might be a bigger need this year. Early last year, the starters were rolling up innings pretty consistently, so the bullpen was never overwhelmed. Plus the extra roster size enabled a limitless stock of relievers to cover whatever innings came along, and the extra innings rule protected, too.... Depending on roster size and rules, maybe there will be fewer arms to cover more innings. And if we've got some pretty shaky inconsistent rotation guys, guys might get knocked out early more often, too.... Last year, they used 9 starters? Original 5 plus Alzolay, and then Colin Rea, Tyson Miller, and Q each had one or two starts. Obviously you're always going to have a bunch of starters at Iowa who can be called up to fill. From a scouting, career-establishment, and competitive perspective, I'm not sure miller's 1 start or Rea's two starters were really an adequate audition to scout them or for them to prove themselves. Neither does one or two starts, even if they're bad, sink your playoff chances.

I think Rea is totally a courtesy move, and one that every team enables. Guy has a chance to make a bunch of guaranteed millions. No teams block that. Good luck to Rea over there.

I wonder if ≤AA will also have delayed finish, or no? We know guys typically get dropped a level or two. Guys at AA start in majors or AAA, guys who start in AA camp normally dropped to A or lower. I imagine the Cubs could really invite almost anybody who's going to end at AA to big-league camp; probably most any top-50 prospects who'd project to play full-season A-ball, too.