craig

It's a long season. Will be interesting to see how a lot of the pitchers settle in over the marathon. Inconsistency tends to be the name of the game at all levels of baseball, so nothing crazy about ODLC looking bad, then good, then perhaps just as bad next time. Too few starts to figure out what the ratio of good/bad will be for any of these guys, yet, over the long haul. I look at the Cubs, Lester's been alternating between bad-sharp-bad-sharp. Darvish has been mostly off but on some. Q has been off and on. Just as I don't think that DArvish's present 6.0 ERA or Quintana's 8+ ERA well represent what they'll probably be over the duration, or that Chatwood is likely to sustain his >8BB/9IP rate, likewise I don't know how representative some of the early results are for the minor league pitchers. But it would be nice if the good outings started to become more normal and the struggle outings rare outliers.

Ademan has K'd over 40% of his AB. Obviously early and small sample, but at this point I wonder if his hitting development might not have been better served with a South Bend assignment. Probably makes no difference, though.

Thanks rubes. Yeah, for a guy whose scouting reports and 1st-round status assumed a plus fastball, that's nothing to get excited about. Hopefully we'll see better in future. But you'd almost think with the adrenaline of opening day, you might expect extra fast if anything... O well, better luck next time, I guess.

What kind of velocity did you see?

Not great opener for little: 0.2-2-4-4-2-1. Pulled him mid-inning at 35 pitches and still only retired two guys.

3 players as in position players, or including pitchers too?

Yeah, obviously odds aren't good for anybody in the 63-98 range. And certainly the Cubs have scads of people who have done research on past outcomes, so they ought to have a more informed take on how variably bad the relatively bad odds are. I thought they'd said in past that odds were higher for finding a pitcher in rounds 2-4 than a hitter, but I may not have understood or remembered correctly. Probably sounds dumb, but one of the reasons I'm interested in drafting pitcher is because you don't need to be 3-plus-pitches-with-control-and-command to end up being valuable. A command pitcher with 3 plus pitches is rare and is really good. But the Cubs have 14 pitchers and use all 14 plenty; you don't need to be a high-end starter to be useful and to have an opportunity to contribute. Plus for position guys, you need to be really good to get a chance to start, and even then you might be blocked. But a pitcher is never blocked.

If they spend all five top-100 picks on pitchers, I wouldn't mind a bit, myself. Maybe without being a great thinker on this; but I'd rather see picks 2-5 go to pitchers. First round pick, if there is an excellent hitting prospect there, terrific. But by pick 63, don't think the chances are very good to get a guy who can both hit and field and hit with power. Foreseeing which pitcher is going to work out is harder than with players, so I think your chance of getting lucky on pitchers in round 2 and 3 is better than with hitters. I also feel like pitchers are better trade fodder.

Lange will not get his first pro win tonight. Pen gives up 2 in the 6th, walks in the tying run. 4-4.

Lange's done after 5, 2 runs, 1 earned. Abbott's done after 5, 5K/1BB but 7 hits and 4 runs. But Abbott is in position to win his first pro decision.

Submitted by Arizona Phil on Mon, 04/09/2018 - 3:31pm Permalink Tennessee RHSP Adbert Alzolay pitched in Extended Spring Training intrasquad game this morning (Monday 4/9) on Field #6 at the Riverview Baseball Complex: 3.1 IP, 1 H, 0 R, 1 BB, 7 K, 2/1 GO/AO, 59 pitches (37 strikes)

A hard 88-90 slider with control could be pretty effective. Nice to see him get off to a good start. Hatch's 6K in 4 innings seems appealing, although 2 walks and a HBP don't at all. Will be interesting to see if his control gets better this year; his stuff last year seemed good, maybe better than I expected; but his control/command was worse.

Thanks for rosters, cal. Bummed on Moreno, was one of my favorite breakout candidates. All told, though, seems like a pretty healthy landscape. If the only injuries are Moreno, and Alzolay being bumped back two weeks, that's not bad at all.

AzPhil: He also said that Vasquez, the teenage SS they drafted from Puerto Rico, hit a HR, has broad shoulders, and projects decent/solid power for a SS. Said he's had a good camp. (He lists 6'1 185). BA was pretty positive about his defense. So might be a guy to watch for. I hadn't recalled him being that tall. He didn't hit much last summer.

Thanks, cal. Yeah, seems like between Phil's info and this, kind of shakes out the significant questions. With Alzolay out, that also settles the Tennessee rotation (ODLC, Clifton, Hatch, Rucker, and Robinson), and Myrtle we already knew I think (Lange, Paulino, Thompson, Moreno, and Hudson). Did we ever get any note on *WHY* Alzolay is behind? Just programmed late start, to save innings for September/October; or was there a physical-health setback?

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?