craig

Did we get $$ on Guerra? $10K? $20K? I think for a new guy in new country, going through full Mesa experience would seem to make sense, depending on what his life and language experience is. I think they have lots of English classes, plus of course lots of Cubs Way instruction and stuff. Much more teaching and practice, lots of fields, etc.. Once in full-season, lots of long bus rides gobble up time that can be spend on instruction in Arizona. I sometimes wonder how much instruction guys really get once they reach full-season?

Rucker's breaking stuff hasn't always gotten very enthusiastic reviews. 55 on breaking ball and 50 on change seems relatively favorable, actually. By the way, Az Phil speculated that Robinson might actually get bumped up to IOwa; would clear rotation spot for Rucker, and 5th spot at Iowa seems open. (Tseng, Mills, Underwood, Farrell. If Robinson does NOT move up, would #5 be Bass or Roth or Hedges or whom?

That Cubs waived him with zero 40-man pressure, but then reclaimed him again back onto the 40, is interesting. Apparently like him enough to use a vacant 40-man spot. But apparently not enough to have minded losing him, and apparently figured it would be nicer to keep as many back-of-40 spots free as possible. Certainly possible that at some point later, they'll want to call up Giminez, or Farrell, or Coghlan, or Anthony Bass, or somebody non-40. And perhaps they figured somebody might get waived, but as it turned out nobody better than Mazzoni did? *IF* he pitches effectively, had he been on a non-roster deal, then if they needed those spots for Giminez/Coghlan/Farrell, for example, they wouldn't have needed to waive and expose him. But now, *IF* he was to pitch really well but need to get non-rostered, perhaps somebody would claim him? I just find it interesting to see some of these small decisions that they make, presumably a super-small decision that will never ever make any difference or matter at all. Still, you never know. Mazzoni was once a 2nd-round pick, and had a 48K/3BB split last year in a post-injury season. Probably fluke, but if not, or if 2nd-year-back-pitchers-pitch-better were to happen, you might possibly have an anti-awful fill-in candidate?

I think this is where we disagree. If he's in Low A for long it's probably not a good thing since he's already been there plus it further throws off the possibility of hitting an elite benchmark in playing AA ball at 20. I also just don't find that level of ball to be informative, much of the challenge is guys just getting used to the travel and the unenjoyable everyday grind of minor league life. ..... Yeah, I really don't get how a hitting prospect can ever get bored. Particularly one like Ademan, whose personal qualities and desire to be excellent are supposed to be strong. He hit .244 at South Bend, maybe he could hit .280 or .300 or something. How can you be bored with that, even if you're hitting .300, when you're making out 70% of the time? If you can hit .300, wouldn't you want to get better and hit .350; and if you could it .350, wouldn't you want to get better and hit .400? Even if you're K'ing 15% of the time, wouldn't a motivated guy want to cut that to 10%? Given the low success rates for even the best hitters, I just can't understand how an aspiring prospect hitter can ever be too bored to want to get better! And assuming you want to get better enough to prompt a promotion, I'd think the motivation to play hard and play well should remain strong.

I agree, he's a good prospect and he might be fine at Myrtle. His development is the priority here. Baez, Russell at the majors, not relevant; Upshaw or Peguero, I don't care about their roster-fill careers, nor about Pelicans W-L record. What's good for Ademan shouldn't be distracted by any of that stuff. Overall it probably doesn't matter at all. If he's good, he'll probably be good at either level. If he's not that good, he'll probably not be that good at either level. He'll learn stuff and improve at either level; he'll be plenty-challenged at either level and won't be bored at either level. Some side-effect advantages of doing Myrtle: 1. *IF* he's able to put up good hitting numbers, it will look somewhat more exciting at the higher level. 2. I wonder if there isn't some team-building aspect? Both A-teams are likely to have terrible player-rosters. But at Myrtle, at least Galindo and Wilson give two guys who might become major-leaguers. Don't expect there are any major-league players at South Bend. Who knows, maybe Ademan, Galindo, Wilson, Lange, Thompson, Moreno, and Paulino can become great pals and move up the system and get used to winning together, all the way to Wrigley.

Thanks for thoughts/analysis on Lange. On Ademan, he was a .647-OPS guy with a .267 OBP at South Bend last year. So if he's ready to rock at Myrtle, great; not for me to question the Cubs scouting eval and development analysis for him. But, it's not like he's proven he can hit Midwest-League pitching yet. Obviously those crummy South Bend numbers are easy to dismiss based on small-sample size. But that likewise reflects that he's got little sample beyond short-season. So not sure it would hurt to play it conservative. If he's already too good for Midwest League, then you should be able to start him there, have him dominate, and promote him later. No harm done. Have good window of club control for Javy and Russell, so no urgency for Ademan to rush. When you rush a guy, then it's harder to process *IF* he struggles. Anything bad can be excused on basis of "not that bad given how young and inexperienced he is....". Hopefully he'll do excellent, and there will be no need to make excuses.

Phil with another article, a fantastic one. *Little and Lange were both great today. *Brady Clark was also good, 97 fastball and hard slider. *Simmons pitched, much to my surprise. https://www.thecubreporter.com/03292018/little-and-lange-dominate-riverview

Az Phil with two significant transaction: Morel down to extended (no surprise, but disappointed anyway) and Oscar de la Cruz UP to Tennessee. That's very rare to move up a level. Think that probably is doubly good news: probably reflects that Oscar has impressed in camp, and probably also that the Myrtle guys have stayed healthy and impressed enough that there was pressure, and moving Oscar UP was a better solution than moving Lange or somebody DOWN. Think that move clarifies those two rotations, by my guessing: *Tennessee: Alzolay, De la Cruz, Hatch, Clifton, and Robinson. (Would seem to leave Rucker out, by my guesstimation.) *Myrtle: Lange, Thompson, Moreno, Paulino, Hudson. (I'm very curious how Moreno might look, by the way. Hopeful that he's going to be a breakout guy....) *South Bend: Albertos, Little, Abbott, Uelmen, Assad. (Would seem to leave Camargo as 6th man, by my valuation....) Not sure how effective some of those guys will actually be (who knows how wild Little might be.....), but that too looks like a really interesting and decent rotation. I can see why they didn't want to relieve Myrtle clutter by sending a Myrtle guy down to join the South Bend rotation, and thought bumping de la Cruz up instead might be better plan.... Other roster note is that Ademan is still there on Myrtle group. May still drop him, but not many days left, and certainly no great pressure from AA-guys to drop down and bump him, just roster-fill org vets there. So no reason to bump Ademan unless they think it would be for his own good.

Thanks for input, friends. After the Heyward/Zobrist draft, it makes me appreciate how fun it is having the Cubs involved again last year and this. Not quite like last year with two firsts, but picking 5 spots earlier does make it more interesting to imagine somebody really good. Having four top-80 picks is really fun.

1. I wonder if Robinson really is regularly working 91-93, versus "touching". Working 91-93, that would be no slower than Abbott or Thompson or Uelmann, probably Lange either. Faster than Lester or Hendricks. Comparable to Arrieta and Quintana. Somehow I'm guessing that his actual routine velocity is maybe a little slower? or else that his spin rate is slow for is velocity, or something? But somehow I don't guess that his fastball is actually as good? But, what do I know.... 2. Agree with peeve. Any college pick who isn't a 1st-round-lightning-promotion stud is never going to win the age game; different age track than HS or internationals. Of course they'll be "old". Doesn't mean a guy can't still become a useful major league guy. As you say, Rucker and Robinson are both AA in 2nd-full-spring; that's reasonably fast. If same arms had signed at 17, they might have same future/potential but have reached AA two years younger. Doesn't mean they are less talented this way.... 3. College guys can still improve. Even Lange, big SEC star, I think he still has lots to add/learn/adjust. (Change; use of 4-seam; pitching up as well as down; learning and integrating cutter.) Can be even more true for low-level guys (Dartmouth; Kyle Miller Florida Atlantic; Tyson Miller California Baptist.) The needs and coaching may not have pushed them to diversity their arsenals. 4. Kyle Miller has a 3.18 ERA thus far. Perhaps "pure crap" doesn't necessarily apply for any of Rucker, Robinson, or Miller, or Clifton either? 5. Justin Hancock is 27. I'm guessing he probably wasn't throwing 96-97 consistently prior to draft (or he'd have gone higher than 9th round)? Sometimes college picks can not only improve their repertoire, they can also sometimes get faster too?

No aggressive predicting here. But to even be discussing Ademan for Myrtle, or Morel or Velasquez for South Bend, and not have it be ludicrous, is amazingly favorable. Of the names you mention, Morel to South Bend would be maybe the one I'd guess is least unrealistic? I'm perfectly comfortable with Lange at South Bend. The rep is "big-level college pitcher", but I think he has a lot of development left. I think it makes good sense to place a guy who really has a new pitch to work on at a modest level, so that every mistake doesn't get punished and he give up too soon. Think the Lange who could be a big-league starter in 3-years might win with a much more developed arsenal than he needed at LSU, but it's going to take some time. Don't rush a guy who could become a rotation mainstay. Keegan Thompson seems like the guy to jump to Myrtle. I'm very interested in Uelman. Cory Abbott seems the forgot, less-respected man. Not sure, maybe he'll go straight to Myrtle. But as with Lange, I think despite his college success last year, I think he may have a lot to develop still. Don't think the Cubs have any need to be aggressive with any of their guys. Big league roster is pretty set, so not much urgency. Perhaps they do feel that trade-game is the thing, and that anybody who shows some young success in full-season is bait. Maybe also that the sooner a pitcher reaches AA, the easier it is to shop him as "almost ready".

Thanks, Cal, that's great news re Adzolay. The difference between him being fine, versus having some significant arm problem, is huge for the system.

Encouraging to see clean line for Tseng. With Maples looking so awful, not sure who else is in the running for options yo-yo, if Simmons is hurt. Does Rosario have any options left, or the big lefty from the Mets system? Or Bass or Alvarez or anybody, in the event they were added to the 25-man? I'm kinda thinking that *IF* Strop (or Wilson) aren't recovered enough to be ready for opening day, but aren't far off, whether there's an options guy you could carry, just in case, for a week, hopefully not having any extra-inning games or games where Lester gets knocked out in the 2nd, so you don't need to use the guy. But if it's a no-options guy, do you want to expose the guy to waivers after the week? Is that worth it? Or could you occupy that spot with an options guy?

Big-market Cubs wanted both Eloy and Gleyber, and could just pay tax. Cubs spent more on Sierra than on Ademan, Amaya, or Albertos; but they were able to just pay tax and get all four. So nobody could leverage them much to trade for Ademan, Amaya, or Albertos dollars. I assume the price will be way, way, way higher, now that big-market teams can't overspend. Way higher. Plus I assume smaller-market teams (with finally a level, fair playing field) will have better reason to sign guys themselves. If you've got a fair chance to get good value by signing guys yourself, why trade your money away? My guess is that the cost of cap space is going to be really, really high, and it will be very difficult to supplement. Might be different late in the "year". Maybe some teams will ave some unspent leftover crumbs late that they might be willing to trade?

Thanks for posts, Cubswin. Not sure if that means anything, but it is a reminder that Perez was a $1.25 guy, and he was VERY young, and IIRC was signed as a defensive catcher who might grow into some power? He was still only 17 last year, and while his .224 average wasn't too hot, it was some progress. Would be really fun if a guy like that started to emerge as a guy who could hit as well as catch, and be worth tracking this summer at Mesa. Thanks too for the Az Phil report. Yeah, Callis who I think still gets Cubs people to talk to him, said Cubs see considerable promise in Little's change, and hope he can be a 3-pitch rotation prospect. *IF* he was able to end up developing both good change and curve, that would give a pretty quality arsenal. That will be hard, though, since nobody seems to view him as a consistent control guy. Maybe Cubs think that could be in there, too, and that's why they used a first on him? Curve and change are both super-hard-to-control and hard-to-throw-for-strikes pitches, so the odds aren't great. But very fun to have Phil giving a report and having his observations be very positive. That would be so awesome if BOTH Little and Lange had good summers and both came out looking like smart, good-value picks.

Positive Ademan stuff is encouraging.

Thanks for Az Phil link, Cal. Very helpful to see who's on rehab. Helpful to see who's getting the two-inning camp outings, since those are basically rotation guys. The BA book had questioned whether Uelman would start or relieve, but he was in the 2-inning starter role.

BA book lists him as a reliever, said he got up to 94-96 in relief, but was 90-93 in rotation. Doesn't scout any of his offspeed pitches as more than average if that. So, they basically view him as a guy with no good-stuff pitches in rotation, and just the fastball in relief. Basically a no-stuff command guy. Doesn't seem that different a scouting report from what other media guys give. BA may be right, and none of the other scouting writeups seems to like is stuff very well either. Still, kind of a puzzle how he can be whiffing guys all the time without actually having any good pitches? He averaged over a K-per-inning, so it would seem that even if none of his stuff seems particularly sharp, that somehow A-ball hitters still miss it a lot. Perhaps it's just a testament to the value of command; if you're getting ahead 1-2 on three guys per inning, and you throw so many fastball strikes that guys are expecting a strike, maybe you don't need anything sharp to still be getting some A-ballers to chase and whiff. Or, maybe there's something in the delivery that's deceptive, so guys can't easily distinguish a so-so curve from a fastball, and end up K-ing even thought the curve doesn't have much spin rate or anything? It's just weird.

What rule is dumb? That they test for anything at all? Or for some particular thing(s) that are on the banned list and perhaps shouldn't be?

Don't imagine Cobb will come in at $52/4. The deals don't really seem to be coming in particularly low. My guess is that if he didn't feel like he had offers better than that, he'd have signed with Twins before this. And my guess is if the Twins thought they could get him at that kind of price, they'd have signed him rather than give up an excellent prospect for Odorizzi.

https://www.cubsinsider.com/2018/02/13/watch-yu-darvish-introductory-press-conference/ The two press conference, DArvish and then Theo/Jed/Maddon. Very positive. They are very positive above Yu and his stuff, and seem to think both they and Yu have ideas for how he can be better. Maddon is very enthusiastic about things, that everybody seems in great shape, attitude is positive, etc.. It does seem a different vibe. Last year, seemed like a lot of the spring talk was looking back at the World Series year. This year, seems very forward-looking. Very little baseball-detail comments. Re-emphasized that Monty will be in camp rotation, and the expectation that he'll start a lot of games. Maddon was all positive about MM, and had no concerns with his attitude or state-of-mind. Some positivism about Chatwood, think he's got a lot to give and they'd ID'd him as a target early. Hoyer reviewed the target on adding strike-throwers to the bullpen, and viewed Cishek, Morrow, and Duensing as having accomplished that goal. (Morrow has a career 3.9 walk-rate, so I'm a little nervous there.) Theo mentioned that they might not need to do anything next winter, since everybody is under club-control; but of course acknowledged that things can change. Darvish was all interpreter in press conference, but Maddon said he's talked to him and his English is good. (It was pretty obvious that for most questions, Darvish understood the question in English, even before translation. Probably hearing it twice and having extra time gives more chance to compose answers.) They repeatedly emphasized the desire to have FA signed before camp, so he'd have time to fit in and go through everything with the rest of the team and not have disruption or awkwardness. Maddon had no new plan for leadoff, sounded very prepared to platoon and improvise there.

has anybody found a link to the full press conference? I think it touched on much beyond Darvish, no?

Yeah, it seems strange. When I heard Theo say it, I didn't take it at all negatively as a few of you have. Theo has talked a few times about how disappointed and frustrated he's been for the players this offseason. Can't imagine many other front office types have talked like that. He's said all the right things even if he doesn't mean it. That was a pretty long press conference. I didn't hear the whole thing (wish I had). But yeah, just what I'd read or heard in clip, I didn't take it all negatively, bad taste, braggy, inappropriate. I think it's a great insight into the interconnectedness of management decisions. I admit I was not that sure the Eloy/Q trade was wise at the time. I knew Q's contract was good, but I don't think I appreciated then that might help enable an offseason like this. So as a fan, I think it was a very helpful, and straightforward insight, by Theo. If explaining some of the management logic comes across as braggy, it didn't to me.

He never wanted Arrieta.... at Boras's price. I'm not at all convinced he might not have been interested, **if** Boras would have ever wanted to talk seriously involving the types of dollars that Darvish ended up signing for. Beats me, what do I know. Maybe they didn't want Arrieta, and "we thought Boras is asking too much, he never called us to tell us otherwise" was always just an excuse to not engage. But my hypothesis has still been that they had discussions with Boras, perhaps after the season, certainly dating back over the last couple of years; that they already had an understanding of what Boras wanted and thought it was too much; and that they didn't have reason to do much talking.....: until/unless Boras was to call them back and tell them that in view of the actual market, he was ready to reconsider and reduce his asking price after all. But again, what do I know.

I heard differently though. The Cubs made this their final offer to Darvish and while waiting for confirmation from his agency, got in contact with Boras to offer a similar deal to see where Arrieta is at (which ended up being rejected by Boras). Arrieta's offer on the table was more about curtailing speculation that there is something wrong with him as to why the Cubs didn't pursue him. Had Darvish rejected the offer, it might be a different story and Arrieta would be in play but not likely with what Boras is seeking. This was about the Cubs getting a better pitcher at a cheaper rate in Darvish over Arrieta rather than some injury cover-up. Teams can look at Arrieta's drop in velo if they have injury concerns. Not sure I'm tracking. 1. If Boras had said yes, quickly, would they have been fine with Jake? In other words, if they offered both pitchers the same offer, would they have been interchangeably fine with either guy? 2. Would they have actually preferred Jake, price being equal? In other words, they kinda knew Boras would say no, but would they have been as happy or happier to get Jake for the same money? If so, that would argue that their perception differs from a commonly held view that we ended up with the better pitcher. 3. Has price-point been the key all along? Originally we thought Cobb was a target, because he'd cost less, not necessarily because he was scouted as the best pitcher. Has Darvish/Arrieta always been about price point? (Obviously "value" is always a ratio of scouting-projection to price; I'm just wondering whether they liked Arrieta interchangeably well or perhaps a little better as a pitcher; just not enough to justify a significantly more expensive price point.) 4. Was this just a token courtesy/fishing move? Communicate to the league that they don't have problems with Arrieta, it was always just about price-point? So that if somebody else can reach an agreement, they shouldn't be worried that the Cubs secretly know there is something wrong under the hood? And maybe communicate to Jake as well that you were never disrespecting him; it was always about the agent that he'd hired just wanting more. (Jake will be back at other Conventions and be a huge part of Cubs history, so leaving on good terms might be kinda important. And you never know whether someday late in is career he might someow come back and pitch for you again....) 5. Perhaps by communicating that you've got no issues with Arrieta other than Boras's price, might that also serve Cubs draft interests if indicating such helps expedite getting him signed somewhere? An extra pick in front of the 3rd round doesn't change a whole lot I wouldn't think, but maybe it would impact a little? Maybe you plan out a little more scouting focus on guys who might fall in that range? Maybe with an extra comp pick, you've got just a little extra discretionary money, and a little more chance to consider sub-slotting there in oder to free up extra cash to superslot with 1st or 2nd picks? Probably nice to just kind of know what you're going to be working with in the draft before the scouting season kicks into full gear?