craig

Carolina has only 8 teams, versus Fl State's 12, so team's should average 2.5 guys per top-20 there. (Especially unlike the big Midwest league...) I was very surprised to see Candelario on the list. (I had both Tseng and Zagunis well ahead of him on my list.) I'd be curious to see their scouting comments. My impression from past is that while Candelario has improved enough to at least have a chance to stick at 3rd, that there was little expectation that he'd be a real asset defensive 3B. For a non-speed guy without an asset glove and with only 5 HR and a .733 OPS, while in his 3rd season in full-A ball, I'd not have thought he'd make the league top-20. Hopefully that means some managers/scouts see something I'd not appreciated: 15-20 HR power projection, and a solid chance to actually get to that? Some split, where he looks much better one-platoon side than his composite switch-hitting numbers tally to? Above-average 3B defense? I'll guess they're more up on his HR power than I'd expected. The funny thing is that he was statistically superior in AA. Equal (5) HR in half the AB. K-rate, HR-rate, BB-rates all were better in AA, with resulting superior slash .291/.379./.462/.841. Will be interesting to see how much he falls off next summer. If he could otherwise replicate his other AA peripherals, while adding an extra 3-5 HR as can happen with a 22-year-old, maybe he'd look pretty interesting.

Sorry! I'd seen the lists some time back, but hadn't realized the off-sync between the different media sources. So, have you guys seen/shared the Carolina League second-ten? Or should that be not-discussed also?

McKinney didn't make either Carolina or Southern League lists. Only 29 games at Myrtle, so agree he wasn't eligible. 77 games, so probably was eligible for Southern? Almora made it as #19 in the Southern list. Southern League was strong, I think, so for Almora to make the list is more encouraging to me than it is disappointing that he wasn't ranked higher.

7. Underwood 13. Candelario 15. Zagunis

The last two months of the Cubs season have highlighted the value both of mid/back rotation guys, and of high-end starters. We've been using Haren; how many mid/back rotation guys wouldn't be much preferable? Same has largely gone for Hammel for the last month or so. Given our playoff roster, how much different might it not look to have Arrieta and Lester backed up by three mid-rotation guys who were fairly capable at that level? For a team that can score runs, and has an excellent bullpen, you can win a lot of games getting solid but non-dominant 5-6 inning starts from your 3-4-5 guys. We also see the value of having some top-end guys. Hammel was quite effective, very effective, as a mid-rotation starter for the first half. So, you can win a ton of games with mid-rotation guys who are doing OK. But, the margin isn't strong there. Not sure what's wrong for Hammel, but he's been quite bad for a while now. Hendricks is often good; but he doesn't have much margin to be off his game. Would be nice to have two really good guys (Arrieta/Lester), a very strong #3, and then have some quality depth so that most of the time your 4/5 guys might perhaps be pitching at Hammel's first-half level, or hendricks's level from last year; but then to also have some other options if guys like that slump.

DelaCruz has his WHIP down to a nice round 1.0. Good size, good numbers, good K-stuff, good control, good age. Everything in order, no red flags. Will be interesting to see how he progresses next year.

1. Eloy Jimenez 2. Gleyber Torres 3. Albert Almora 4. Willson Contreras 5. Billy McKinney 6. Carl Edwards Jr 7. Tseng 8. Ian Happ 9. Pierce Johnson 10. Cease 11. Duane Underwood 12. Mark Zagunis 13. DeLaRosa Heh heh, I put Jiminez 1st, since guys with massive power who don't K all the time and who have reasonable plate patience/discipline have a chance to be great offensive values. Torres has a chance, a good-fielding SS who might hit .250-.260 with 8 HR's would be a good player. But I'm choosing to go with the middle-of-the-lineup power guy who doesn't K as much over the middle-of-the-diamond defense guy who K's more. After Jiminez, Cease is the only other guy I see with potential star-power. Almora doesn't have star-power offensively. But I'm believing that the recent hitting is not a fluke. He's learned to use left field as well as center and right. His plate discipline and walks are fine. Not a lot of power, but not that bad. I assume his low BABIP is because he's a slow RH guy who hits a lot of weak contact. But, I'm also wondering if perhaps the terrible BABIP he was carrying for months isn't sustainable, and that a 44K/28BB/6HR guy really ought to be pretty competitive. He'll still be 21 when his PCL season starts next year, so there's time to boost the power a bit, especially now that he pulls the ball sometimes. I'm certainly influenced by the Cubs situation. Center field is not blocked long term, and outfield defense is terrible. So I think a really good defensive CFer would be a natural fit. (I think with so many high-K guys, they might appreciate a low-K guy to add some balance to the lineup, also.) Right now Almora is a .720-OPS guy, despite some low/bad/perhaps-unlucky BABIP numbers, having started the year at age 20. So, I'm optimistic that there's a fair chance that he'll be able to improve enough over the next several years so that he might be able to support analogous type .720 OPS as a major-league good-fielding CFer. Would a good-defense .720-OPS CFer be a star? No, of course not. But if the Cubs had a .720-OPS good-fielding cost-controlled cheap CFer batting 7th or 9th, I think that would be a rather good value. And given his youth and natural contact skills, I think withstanding promotion without getting killed might be more achievable. (For a guy who's highly K-vulnerable, I think promotion is more problematic than a guy without K-problems.) And I think it's easy to envision upside where he might become more than a .720-OPS guy, too. A .750-OPS CFer with good defense and low salary? Very valuable asset! McKinney and Almora are both 21. Almora is .720 OPS, McKinney .766 OPS (Tennessee). HR's it's 6 vs 7 (on season.) McKinney seems more likely to hit more HR and be a clear value hitter. Plus LF. But for today, I'm going with the good-defense CFer ahead of the shaky-defense LF/RF guy. McKinney could easily flip that, if some power emerges, and if he can establish that his defense is actually just fine. I feel like I should have Zagunis higher. Edwards is wild, but the guys stuff is obviously 1st-rate, and anti-HR means a lot. So in the K/HR/BB trio, he's great-great-awful. Hopeful they can touch him up enough to make it work. I like Tseng. Control can get a guy a long way. Perhaps says something when a guy has a 3.38 FIP at age 20, and we're all disappointed. life with Dan Haren is a reminder that "back-of-rotation" starter might not seem that valuable.... until you don't have one. Tseng and Johnson might not have a lot of star-power, but having some guys who might be solid decent 3/4 starters can help you win a lot of games with a great offense and a strong bullpen. Cease obviously has some possibilities of knockout stuff. Some star-power potential there. Recent reports on DeLaRosa also make me think he perhaps belongs in the pool. Chance to be a good solid starter.

One thing I've liked with Almora is that after he got so hot, but then cooled off, that he limited the "cold" stretch and now has pretty quickly seemed to get back into the groove. Every hitter has hots and colds. The good ones have ways to extend the hots, and to keep the cold periods short.

I've been all in on the rise of the Cubs hitting prospects. But I think we prospect-followers have all been trained and repeatedly reminded that not all prospects work out, and we should expect some failures. But now here we site. Alcantara has washed out. We've seen Castro fail to improve or even sustain. But Schwarber, Russell, Bryant, Soler, all look like they'll be variably good. And now with the recent splurge, there is improved reason to think that Baez may not wash out either, and Almora's getting back into the picture as a possible regular. As optimistic as all of us were, I don't think any of us could have assumed that all six of Bryant, Russell, Soler, Schwarber, Baez, and Almora would all end up being variably decent-or-better starters. But I'm getting more hopeful that both Baez and Almora may still be able to reach that, and we've got a really decent shot that all six of those guys really will make it. Pretty amazing.

Not sure what's changed for Almora in approach. But, he's using left field a lot more. Early in the season it seemed everything was opposite-field/center-field, very little pull field, and one or two video clips I saw seemed to suggest a stance and weight transfer that corresponded. During the hot streak, he's gotten a lot more hits, including many of the extra base hits, to left field. And from the game logs, it's seemed that he's getting a lot more line drives. Context: In some "top ten" lists, Gleyber has tended to be #1, and Almora has tended to be placed in the 5-10 range. Interestingly, Almora's season BABIP is still only .293. If Gleyber had Almora's .293 BABIP, he'd be hitting .229, and he'd not be ranked #1 by any of us. (105K/3HR is not normally conducive to a high batting average.) That Almora's composite numbers involve a low BABIP probably suggests he may actually project more favorably than the numbers suggest, and that it may not be as hard for him to sustain or improve his numbers next year despite promotion to Iowa.

Torres, everybody seems to like him, so I assume he's going to be good. I get the impression that defensively he's somewhat in the Russell mode. Doesn't seem to have an astonishing arm, or have incredible quickness, or be amazing or anything. But Russell seems to just be coordinated and do everything smoothly without unneeded effort. I get the sense that Torres may be of that highly-coordinate don't-make-anything-harder-than-it-is kind of guy defensively? But, nobody seems to scout him as amazing or gold-glovish as defensive SS or anything. He's hitting .296 now, but his BABIP has slipped a little. He'd now down to .379 by my amateur calculation, which is still very, very high, unsustainably. If he had a more normal/solid .310 BABIP, he'd be hitting .243, and he'd probably not be ranked so strongly. 102K/443 AB, it's not like he's showing himself to be a remarkable contact guy or anything. 102K/3HR ratio, that's rather scary offensively. But, he's 18 in full season, so who knows how much all of that stuff might improve with age. Still, I see him as being a potential good player. Plays solid defense (although not incredible gold-glovish or anything) and hits reasonably well. (But not with star-like contact or star-like power.)

The list has limited star-power. Eloy, and perhaps Cease, are the only guys who'd seem to have exceptional talents. And with Cease, the injury history and the wildness make that pretty low-probability. I think Happ perhaps tends to be overrated based on draft position. He K's like crazy already in low-A, I think his odds of becoming a useful major-leaguer are pretty shaky. Somebody has to go in the top-5, but I have a hard time being very confident about a guy who has so much contact trouble already in low-A. 30K/100AB. Edwards is very wild, and after being wild last year as well there's no reason to think it's a fluke. But, it's a thin line between being uselessly wild and wild but still effective. The Edwards/Marmol comp is good. I tend to remember the hopelessly uselessly wild Marmol of the end; but he had four years (2007-2010) where he was very useful, at times really good, despite being wild. If Edwards could be like the 2007-2010 Marmol, or perhaps modestly less wild than that, you've got a pretty valuable guy. Very iffy, though.

Good list, Tim. For me way different layout than in past. Was a pretty clear differentiation last year, between the top group and then McKinney/Almora type plateau. Here I see some break around 12. I'd keep your first 13 names, but have a big break between the plateau that then includes limited long-shots like Vogelbach and Candelario. I'd maybe put Sands, who's mostly struggled a lot this year, showing neither high-level command nor notably good pure stuff, and Steele, outside of the top 13. Top 12: Players: Torres, Contreras, Jiminez, Almora, McKinney, Zagunis, Happ Pitchers: Edwards, Tseng, Johnson, Cease, Underwood

Ryan McNeil has improved as the season has progressed. Not sure what his actual stuff is at this point, but he's putting together an interesting season.

So, pitching on once-a-week rest in college, 3-4 fastballs per month? In-fifth-day grind, might be tougher. But, who knows. Guys can get somewhat stronger/faster at/after 21, sometimes. A little tweak, a little added strength, some steroids or supplements, it's possible. Usually guys who struggle to touch 92-93 touch it with low-movement 4-seamer, the relatively ineffective fastball variant that they don't and shouldn't use much anyway. Touching 92 with 4-seam probably fits with normally working with 86-90 actual fastball that can actually get some outs.

Contreras continuing to be rarely listed is almost as surprising as how Almora continues to get listed. Just the tenure system, Almora has been a routine listed guy and Contreras hasn't been, so it can't be changed? I wonder if to some degree whether while Contreras's defensive tools are solid physically, that perhaps his intangibles don't rate well? Maybe he's quick and has a solid arm, but scouts see him as a poor framer, poor pitch-caller, and poor at working with pitchers? Fair chance that many rankers have no real scouting info on details like that, though.

21.4 Caveat: we need to be cautious about using "age-versus-average" logic to value a prospect. I think it's more useful to use "age-per-league-top-10" Real, meaningful big-league prospects usually have a much lower average age than league-average. With Vogelbach, for example, he was always "young-per-league", but never "young-per-league-top-20". The nice thing with Torres is that he is very young not only per league, but also relative to his league's top-20.

Edwards hasn't shown any control since leaving A-ball. If he gets some, he could become a good pitcher in one role or another. But I can't put him in my top 10, or expect anybody else to put them in their overall top-100, when he has no control.

Morrison deal $30K. I think that leaves $1,129,205 left with which to sign Hudson. Cubs had $976K available prior to the morrison signing, the extra $152 available pushes past both the $1.0 and the $1.1 thresholds. Who knows exactly how a family comes up with a price tag. *Million is a round number threshold, so I'd guess there are a lot of families who say $1.0 is their price tag; maybe that was Hudson and now they'll have an extra $129K to save or overslot? *Or maybe Hudson was $1.1; "over a million dollars" felt more aggressive and sophisticated than just flat 1.0? *Perhaps they were using slot position to pick their price? $1,129,205 would fall in between the 11th and 12th slot values of round 2. So, perhaps family and advisor figured that they wanted to be top-half of the 2nd round? Expectation satisfied. *Or, maybe they set "top 50" as their goal? The slot for pick 50 is $1.196, in which case the cubs are $63K short. Would a kid spike a $1.13 deal because it's $0.06 short? Doubtful.

Yeah, that's what I've got too. If morrison signs for $5K, typical, then the Cubs should have $1,154,205 left for Hudson. Don't know why Callis would think that's a reach. Cubs talk to all these guys in advance. I assume that's what they had for his bill. *If that wasn't close, they'd not have picked him. *If that wasn't close, they'd not have gone and picked Wilson at his list-price. If it was close, but is a little short (for example Hudson was $1.2 or $1.3 as his cutoff, and now they don't quite have that....), then they'd have hard-balled a little harder on Happ, Dewees, and/or Wilson. (If they're going to end up $50-200K short on Hudson, they'd have fought harder and longer to free up that level of cash.) Not worried at all about getting Hudson signed. But, everything in it's turn, and as we know from Houston's Aiken/Nix blunder, the Cubs can't sign Hudson until the Morrison deal is totally done, physicals passed, no going back.

gotta figure Twomey just wanted to sign and get started. Surprising with Dewees. I wouldn't have guessed. Explains why it took so long for him to sign, I'd wondered why a presumed slot-signing would take so long. Obviously what's surprising or not surprising to me is based on expectations. And what the Cubs actually do is based on their scouting evals, wise or unwise as they may be. When Dewees gets a significant overslot, and when the Cubs pick Wilson where they did with the expectation of a large overslot, I guess it suggests that the Cubs scouted them much more favorably than we might have assumed based on BA types. We'll see whether the Cubs scouting makes any sense, down the road. (I wish we'd stuck with the consensus valuation on Hannemann....)

I've not been following the CWS. Morrison and Peitzmeir's teams have only been eliminated within the last week or so, correct? So, I'm sure nothing happening with wilson and Hudson signings until Morrison and Peitzmeier's contracts get finalized, including all physicals and everything. I don't doubt that Hudson and Wilson have their deals all wrapped up, conditional on Morrison and Peitzmeier. But obviously you can't sign an overslot until you're sure you've got the money in hand, and until Morrision and Peitzmeier are official, you can't be sure you've got everything you expect to have. Heh heh, I've sometimes wondered how the "passing physical" process works. I'm sure the GM could override a doctor's "failed physical" report. But imagine that Wilson and Hudson have agreements, and their deals are simply waiting for Morrison/Peitzmeier $$$. What if a very academic guy like Morrison failed his physical, and realized that his health wouldn't permit a worthwhile pro career, so decided to bag it? The Cubs would be stuck without his money. Or, what if the Cubs doctor failed Peitzmeier, but McLeod needed the money. I'm sure McLeod could override the doctor's failed physical and sign the guy anyway, just to free the money, even without any expectation that the guy would ever pitch a pro inning.

Anybody know what's happened with Turner? he hasn't pitched in a box-score game since the previous weekend, and got skipped in the Tennesee rotation. Did he perhaps do some throwng in a cage during a rain day? Or perhaps have a setback of some sort?

Rose said he'll play 3rd and that his pitching days are done.

Rose signed. Dewees is reported to have been straight slot deal.