craig

Cubs spent over $30, right? $18+ on players, and then with tax that puts them over $30 in actual expense? Can't fault the willingness to spend.

16th round pick from Old Dominion is a catcher-to-pitcher convert, supposedly strong arm. A lot of catchers have good arms, so who knows.

I could imagine just some modest overslots might be an interesting tool to apply for college guys you like. I imagine a lot of college juniors kind of want to sign and start their pro careers Maybe guys though they would be 4th-7th round 2nd day picks and get $200-400K, and listed ≥$200K on their sign ability survey. But, if Day 2 finishes and nobody has picked you; maybe you figure you'll have to just take the $100 and go forward. But, since you listed ≥$200K on your survey, maybe teams still make sure they call and confirm you'll really sign for $100K before using a pick on you. So, what if the Cubs call a bunch of these guys, and say "we can't go ≥$200K on you, but we can scrape up enough to make $135. Will you sign if we draft you and offer that? If so, make sure you tell any other teams who call you that you've got an overslot deal arranged, so you aren't going to sign for $100K, so they shouldn't draft you if $100K is all they're willing to pay." Maybe must by boosting from $100K to $135-150K, the Cubs can drive off a lot of competition and get a whole string of modest-overslot college pitchers they kinda like on Day 3?

11th rounder Michael Rucker said they are paying him >$100K, so he's one of the overslots. Not surprising, really that 11th rounder would overslot. As Round 2 winds down and then between day 2 and 3, you talk to guys you like to see who'll sign for what you can/want-to pay. If you reach a mutual agreement on an overslot guy, you want to draft him ASAP before somebody else does, rather than wait till round 30 or whatever. So rounds 11-12-13 are the most likely overslot rounds on Day 3. Rucker said he's got an agreement, short of some details. Mekkes said he's got an agreement, too, short of some details. So, two overslots agreed, will be interesting to see how far over they got.

That reputable, thoughtful guys would have not only Cease but also Zagunis going top 20 in their re-draft is pretty interesting. Zagunis was not a pick that the board was all that buzzed about at the time: college guy, not an overslot, not a pitcher, not a guy that scouting reports had projected as going higher than he did. Just a pure scouting pick, I think. I'm still surprised these guys would have him in redraft first round. Kind of fun surprise to see him getting that kind of respect.

Thanks, Dave, very helpful post. I've kind of been wondering where the overage and where the under slot savings are going to go, with Cruz coming in cheap, both 8 and 9 likely to be very cheap, and even with our small pool there is still some overage available. So, where's it going to go? Maybe they like Mekkes quite a bit, and he's going to gobble it all? Maybe one or more of your names from rounds 20-40? Helpful to think about who might be targeted, at any rate. Maybe it will all go to Mekkes and Hatch, both being sophomores. I wonder, though; Hatch will be 22-going-on-23 next draft. Does he really want to come back to next draft as an approaching-23-years-old guy? Might be better off to take his slot now, and get his career moving, I'd think.

Thought: Cubs have a large scouting staff, but they must have been able to really focus their time. Other teams have been scouting hitters; scouting high school players; scouting top-50 guys. Cubs didn't need to spend (waste?) any time on any of those three groups of players. Unfortunately. But, you'd think that by spending all of their scouting resources on non-top-50 college pitchers, there should be no team in baseball better equipped to discriminate among that large group of arms.

Oops, at Miller's age the difference between turning 20 and almost 21 is nontrivial. Too bad. Still seems heavily a projection guy. The delivery in the video looks like a development team might analyze and adjust that, maybe get a little more out of it. Pure projection and a project for the development guys.

6/4, slender, turns 21 next month. A projection/scouting pick.

Yeah, I'd think there would be just the four, Contreras, Torres, Eloy, and Almora.

Zagunis is overdue for a big slump. I think it was around this time in the season last year that he was up over .900OPS and was at or near the top of all the Carolina League stats, and then he settled way back into the low .800's. But for now: BA: 9th OBP: 3rd OPS: 8th Slugging: 12th Pretty fun production, in a pretty big league. At 23 he's not exactly young or very projectable, but he's not old. Every step up the ladder where a guy can hold serve.... not that many steps left.

Agree that Zagunis looks like an interesting prospect. Obviously no standout tools, so he's not a significant trade chip. But a guy who's consistently .400+ OBP, consistently .800+ OPS, and consistently at least .400 slugging, and who has at least a little athleticism, that's got to be a candidate to be a useful major leaguer. Got a chance to be a professional hitter. And he's still young enough that there's some chance for improvement. A little more power? A little more drive and less ground balls? Sometimes it's the best and smartest hitters who are best able to identify and adjust to minimize their flaws. This will sound dumb, but he reminds me a little of a Cardinals prospect. Seemed they often had these college players, who weren't big tools guys and were never highly rated prospects, and who didn't come up young. But when some need created an opportunity, they so often seemed to have a next-man-up who was able to play solid, professional baseball. Could imagine Zagunis having a trajectory like that.

Very substantial. Once Contreras graduates, it seems Eloy and Gleyber are pretty easy 1-2 guys, in whichever order. That was some pretty smart and effective IFA work two summers ago, to get what will soon be our top two guys. Hard to match that class, but hopefully this summer's IFA class will also be really successful, too.

Thanks for the clip. What do you pitching-mechanics experts think of Clifton's delivery? I have no idea, other than that it looks unusual, and possibly not very conducive to consistent control, and perhaps somewhat stressful on the arm. But I have no idea. Perhaps it's also hard for hitters to pick up? Perhaps it's hard to Clifton to throw different pitches with the same delivery, such that hitters can tell what's coming? Anyway, rather interesting and somewhat non-standard, to my super-amateur superficial impression.

Thanks for the Cease info. Nice to see some flashes of control. Hopefully the consistency of control will increase as time goes by.

Tom, has Kellogg always been something of a flyball guy? Do you think that if they moved him to relief, eventually, that he might be able to tick it up a little and have Travis Wood-level velocity? Does his stuff/arm-slot give him any LOOGY potential, or not much for splits?

Thanks much, philosopher. Tim, I'd guess that is a somewhat slow gun. Phil said Vosler ripped the fastest pitch of the game, and that was only 92. Don't think there are ever A+ games on a normal gun where somebody isn't going higher than that. And it seems those speeds are also relative, in the order we'd expect: Farris But clearly doesn't indicate that either Stinnett or McNeil are especially fast.

Yeah, Contreras is a terrific prospect. After last season, some wondered whether the hitting was for real. That Q has been answered. How good the defense and will become remains a question, but he's a really, really good prospect. After last season, some wondered whether Almora's 2nd-half hitting rebound was for real. That Q too seems to have been answered favorably. (Although the up-tick in walk rate has been soundly disproven.) He's a really, really good prospect. Tom is totally correct, Edwards has shown dominant stuff from start to finish. Perhaps more dominant since relief conversion than had ever been true before. The K/HR profile is remarkably good. Tom's point is also true, I think, that while his control has never been good, it was never really awful until last year. We'll see how it goes as the season progresses. He's had 12 games this year, 5 of his 7 walks have come in two of them. He's a really really good relief prospect. I think it's very plausible to envision him blossoming into a guy on the Strop or Grimm level, perhaps even a little bit better depending on how his control goes. Or perhaps like the good version of Carlos Marmol, or perhaps even a shade better. Very, very good prospect. Each of those guys has a lot of good, each has a question or two (Contreras defense; Almora walks/power; Edwards walks.) We're fortunate to have all three of them.

Also take a look at Jason Vossler. He's been the best hitter on the team all season, with a .900+ OPS and .400+ OBP, and a 1:1 BB/K rate. He's 22 all season, so age is fine. I think the Cubs staff like him. I'm curious what his defensive capacity is. So if you could give any impressions of his defensive arm, or whether he looks like he has size for any OK power. (He hit 10 HR's last year, but only 1 this year. His BABIP is quite hit this year, like .389; after being really probably flukishly low last year.) From the pitching, any gun numbers or impressions about Stinnett would be really helpful, he's a possibly significant prospect. Some of the relievers also are worth watching. James Farris has 26K/6BB/19IP, and a 0.93 ERA. He was very good for South Bend last year as well, so he might be a real pitcher. Daury Torrez and Ryan McNeil also quite interesting, both have gotten some high-velocity reports, and Torrez some low-arm-slot talk. Would be fun to get your impressions, if either of them pitch. Hope you get a good game and get to see Stinnett at his best!

He's matched last year's HR output. 3 each year.

I voted Clifton and Blackburn. Wouldn't it be fun to combined Blackburn's command with Clifton's stuff? :) Hannemann is hitting .240 thus far, a little below his career average of .245, and he's never been much of a power guy. Not sure he's got enough bat to be all that exciting.

Maybe add this guy to the poll! From CubsDen "17 year old Jose Albertos was the most impressive pitcher on the day, sitting at 94 and flashing a plus curve. Albertos has been tough to hit but what made the difference today was exceptional command as he struck out the side in order.".

That's not good. Odd that they pulled Stinnett after only 54 pitches. Thornton has been starting, so maybe he's missed starts and they want to get him some innings, or something? Stinnett's continued to have the ground ball thing going, and his ERA is now down below 2. Small sample, obviously, but seems pretty different from last year. It's a different world when you throw strikes!

Stinnett and Clifton, in that order. Clifton probably a somewhat better arm, but Stinnett at present is showing hints of developing the command the Cubs envisioned for him when they drafted him. Clifton is showing the stuff we hoped he'd develop, but he's still really, really wild. Three years younger. All wild pitchers were 21 once, and most wild young guys are wild forever, but perhaps with time he'll be able to develop some control of his breaking stuff.

Thanks, Duke. Super reports, love the detail! Really helpful. Too bad on Eddy. Very encouraging on PJ, though, that he looks athletic. The positives on his catcher defense, as a very new, inexperience catcher convert, is really fun. That he looks as good as his batting line shows is also fun. And very encouraging that Eloy looks (and sounds) legit. Thanks so much for being willing to put so many of your observations into words. Love it.