craig

I like Jackson. Obviously McLeod and those guys will need to scout and decide. But some of the stuff I've read suggests that he can stay at catcher. Heh, a guy who hits like Mike Piazza can play catcher as badly as Mike Piazza, and be awesome. (I'm not suggesting Jackson would be as bad defensively as Piazza; the scouting is much more favorable, as I read it. Only that even if you are a bottom quartile defensive catcher, if you are a great hitter you can still be a huge value, and be a 12-time all star and finish 7 times in the top-10 of MVP voting.) Jackson could be much like Bryant. A lot of people questioned Bryant's ability to play 3rd; McLeod claimed that he thinks he can play a solid 3B, and that he can be a great value while playing 3rd but still be a great value if/when/after he moves to the OF. It wouldn't shock me if they had analogous view on Jackson, that he's so good a hitter that he'll be great value if they move him to LF or RF; and if he can play catcher well, or well enough, that's just frosting. All scouting, for sure. Defense and catcher-ability, yes. But as much or more is whether he really projects as a great hitter who you'll be happy with even if does move.

Yeah! :)

I'm a ways out on these, but some I'd like will be: Tseng Jose Paulino Rosscup Willson Contreras

OK, I am persuaded and backed off to one vote, Vizcaino. I know he may never get healthy, I know that even if he is his delivery and stuff may not be the same as they were before, I know that even if he is healthy he may not stay healthy for long, and I know that even if he is healthy he'll be used in relief, not rotation. I get all that risk. But there were reports of 98 and sharp slider this fall. So if he's not 100% now, but is coming along fine, and by McLeod's account will be ready for camp, I'm not that concerned that he's not ready today. Most of the prospects here aren't going to be winning games for the Cubs this year anyway; so the fact that Vizcaino won't be starting with the big-league Cubs this April isn't a downer. He's going to be on limited work this summer regardless. Whether his box scores run from April-July or from May-August doesn't matter. His stuff was so good before that if he can come back, and even if that's only in relief and perhaps with slightly diminished stuff, he's still very valuable.

Thanks, NC. Arguella's 88-92 sounds pretty hopeful, for a semi-rehab year and given the alleged "heaviness" of Wells's ball. Perhaps he will be healthier and add a couple mph, such that his fastball is really a plus pitch this year, and his breaking stuff will take a step. Would be pretty fun if he emerged as a good prospect. Wells is still only 21, so there's lots of time to make improvements. His 69K/40BB/7HR splits look pretty blah, but guys are always changing, so could be very different, hopefully for good, this year and in future.

Same for me, I guess with Blackburn last. Note: I think the perception on Blackburn hinges on how we perceive his ceiling, which in turn hinges on how we perceive his fastball. I think one view is that he's already regularly throwing 95, so he's got plenty of fastball arm. And he was still a teenager with physical frame to add more strength, so that those 95's might become a lot more routine and he may be faster than that. If we project him as having plus or plus-plus velocity on his fastball, that combined with his intelligence, feel, potential control, and breaking ball give him the chance to be a really, really good pitcher. But if his fastball is viewed as basically average, and that without a heavy sinker, maybe the TORP possibilities don't seem as possible. I have no idea. I found it interesting that Vineline, which is a Cubs publication, which usually has some access to McLeod input, and which usually is so favorable that it makes every Cubs prospect sound great and super talented, writes up Blackburn's current velocity as "average", although with the possibility to grow into some more. Will be interesting to see how that all looks this year for him. Maybe the 95 is real, but that's an occasional show-me 4-seamer on an I-feel-strong-and-fast-today day, and perhaps he throws twenty times as many fastballs as 2-seamers that are nearer 90 than 95. Still, a solid-average fastball with control, location, smarts, combined with a very good breaking pitch can win an awful lot of big-league games.

That all seems consistent, with the usual "works at" versus "tops at" differential. Typical righty will top 5-6 higher at times relative to his normal working velocity. Hendricks is notorious for lacking velocity, but he too works mostly in the 80's and touched 92-93 like 13 Wells. Perhaps 2014 Wells will show up faster and healthier, and show the kind of big-time power sinker we'd hoped for pre-injury.

That's my recall as well.

Yeah, why not? I think for Johnson, the progress of his cutter will be important for his progress. It's possible that if his cutter can be effective without taking away from either his fastball or breaking ball, that he will have a nice season.

Wells had a bad arm two years ago, chose rest/rehab over surgery, and came back last year with a slow fastball. I don't know how rehab and arm healing works. Can some guys who rehab a bad arm come up with ways to strengthen it and recover lost velocity? If so, a guy like Wells (or maybe Loux) might have a shot. But I don't think he'll have much chance with Hendricks-scale velocity. It's a fun and bold prediction and fun thing to imagine having Wells show up with his arm feeling good as new, and faster than ever.

"one of CJ or PJ" Are you thinking one will get hurt or disappoint to fall off the list? Or that one will pitch so well that he'll graduate and get too much big-league service to remain eligible? I suppose that between the bad and the good option, the odds are pretty significant. Otherwise, that's not especially ambitious. I'm pretty hopeful that both of those guys will stay healthy enough, and impress enough, to NOT fall off the top-100. And I don't really expect either to be early call ups, even if they do perform very well. Essentially your four include only one of CJ/PJ staying interesting, and only one of the 10-15 guys on the farm stepping up significantly. Realistic, perhaps. Maybe that's statistically typical as well. Still, not especially bold or optimistic. If the Cubs procure-and-develop plan is going to be ultimately successful, they're going to need to have better than typical luck/success with some of their prospect development.

I want names..... I'd guess CJ/draft pick in top 50, PJ and one of Zy/Black/Blackburn/Skulina/other draft pick in the last spot. That is totally plausible. If you draft a pitcher at #4, he's pretty safe to rank top-50, I'd think. Your layout works very well, and doesn't seem that much of a reach at all. Vizcaino's another candidate for top-100, if he ends up healthy and impressive, but the Cubs limit his work and shut him down before he racks up enough big-league service to become ineligible.

I voted Z, Hendricks, and Vizcaino in no particular order (as I have for the last two rounds). But I view Blackburn and Black in that same pool. Hendricks/Blackburn: nice contrast in proven success versus future possibility. I like them both, a lot. That guys like that, and others of comparable value, can be falling in our 12-16 range is very encouraging. I think the pitching might look a lot more optimistic as he year goes by. Blackburn is 95 vs Hendricks is 88 is deceptive. That's using Blackburn's top versus Hendricks's working average. Blackburn may have hit 95 a number of times in his first two starts, but his average working velocity is normally lower, probably 89-92; and Hendricks can hit 92 at times, he just doesn't work there often. I think this also touches on Blackburn versus Underwood. Does Underwood have a higher ceiling because he touched 98 twice? Maybe. But it's not like he's routinely throwing 98 and doing so for strikes. I think often the effective working velocity between some of these guys tends to be compressed. I am encouraged to hear that some scouting sources are apparently fairly buzzed on Blackburn. If he has gotten stronger and will continue to get enough stronger so that he can be routinely working 91-93 and popping some 95-96 change-of-pace fastballs at times, that combined with his curveball and his feel for pitching could make him a very, very good prospect. My guess when it all shakes out is that his fastball will not be unusually fast, but if he can throw with average speed while having above average location and an excellent breaking ball, even average velocity may be enough to give him well above-average big-league success.

Will be interesting, maybe they will. In Cubs case, the facilities in DSL are really good, and a lot of the instruction there. So maybe "staying" in DSL is not a disadvantage instruction-wise, whereas perhaps with some teams that would be true. But yeah, it would sure be fun to have them up in Mesa right away, in the box scores, getting Az Phil reports, etc., and poised so that if either did do well, they'd be on schedule for Boise next year and full-season as early as 2016. May depend a bit on their English and stuff, too.

Thanks much, Dave. Inconsistent guy with control problems and two shoulder histories is anything but safe. Still, all those K's don't come just by chance. If the shoulder is sound now and stays sound, he's an interesting wildcard that could be a pleasant surprise. Given the situation at the back of the Cubs rotation, it wouldn't shock to see him fairly quickly.

I assume he is just speculating/assuming. How would he know?

Thanks, david. Not sure badler will be right on either count, either guy starting in Mesa or Torres breaking out. Of course, pretty hard to get recognized as a big breakout guy if he,s in DSL, even were he to have a really good summer. Would sure be sweet if both of those guys flashed well this summer and looked like the real deals.

Does anybody have a really good read on Neil Ramirez's rather roller-coaster career? He's had some inconsistencies. 1. Hickory 09 vs 10. He was very wild year one (5.6 BB/9 in 2009) then reversed (2.4 BB/9 in 2010). 2. 98 innings in 2011. 140 the year before, 123 year following. What kind of injury did he have? 3. 2011-2012: After finishing 2010 in A-, and despite whatever injury he had in 2011, he still rocketed from A+ to AA to AAA in 2011, including a competitive 3.64 ERA with 86K/74IP in AAA. Looked like a man on the rise, at age 22. But then the next year he got demolished in the same AAA level, with 7.66 ERA and a horrendous 15 HR/74 innings. What changed? And then what unchanged last year? I don't know his story well at all.

I agree that it's a "mess" in that it's hard to sift them out. If there was a guy with both great talent who'd also showed great proven performance at a highish level, he'd not be under discussion here in the second ten. Anybody who's left here is still on the board because there are health concerns (Vizcaino, Olt, Ramirez); limited talent concerns (Hendricks); far distant and/or unproven concerns (Blackburn, Eloy, Rivero, Z); or known performance concerns (Cabrera, Olt, Ramirez.) I think "average"/"somewhat intriguing" is more negative than my perception. I think there are a number of guys who have the potential to be very good major leaguers. Guaranteed? Of course not. Probable? Of course not. HOF talent? Probably not. But Vizcaino had a really good arm and by account was throwing very hard again. It's no guarantee that any pitcher can come back, stay healthy, and have useful control. But there are plenty of very good big-leaguers who lost some time to surgery once. He could be very, very good. Rivero has a chance to be a very, very good reliever. If Blackburn can stay healthy, he'd seem to have a chance to become very good. Tseng. Zastrysny. Eloy projects to have really good power, perhaps Soler-esque. Seems to me there are still some names here who have a chance to combine both very good big-league talent with excellent big-league skill. Of course we don't know which ones, if any, will work out seriously well. But I think there is definitely some number of ceiling guys left.

I've got Hendricks, Z, Vizcaino, and Blackburn all in a bunch here. I left Blackburn off this time, but I like all four of them. Somehow I don't really believe in Ramirez. But I can see how some of you like him here. He throws enough K's and has enough velocity to be pretty good. I'm voting for Vizcaino, which may sound hypocritical, but I'm kind of concerned that Ramirez had shoulder problems. It may be paranoid, but I have the feeling that shoulder-problem guys don't often rest-rehab them to full health. May be a ticking time bomb. But, somebody is going to have to start games for the Cubs this year. If Rusin is #5, Hendricks and Ramirez seem like guys who might compete to get a shot So if Ramirez did come out just fine physically, and put in 6 weeks in Iowa that mirrored his performance at Frisco, he might be in the Cubs rotation by June.

Toonster's going to get all the I-told-you-so's if cabrera emerges as a useful big league reliever some day. He's not on my top-30, either. Funny thing with him, he gets the buzz for "big stuff", but he's pretty much always been easy to hit. His hits-per-inning rate, his HR rate, and his WHIP's have always been high. I know he's got a big-league are strength/velocity-wise, and he can throw some pitches that look very good at times. But I suspect a lot of results are based less on the best pitches a guy throws, but on the frequency and badness of the mistakes. But, you never know. A good pitching coach, a little confidence, a little tinkering, and maybe suddenly hitters can't tell his sliders from his fastballs anymore. Or maybe a guy adds a cutter and hitters can't guess movement and location anymore. Keep up the good fight for your guy, toonster. I do wonder if he has a good spring, if there's any chance a team will claim him? I assume he's pretty easy safe to waive down to Iowa, but you never know; sometimes teams will claim a good-armed guy like that.

Thanks, guys, good to remember. That would limit some of the discretionary AB's the manager has to allocate. Still, between 3B/1B/LF/DH, I think there should be enough for both Olt and Villanueva. If Lars Anderson or Szczur lose some 1B/LF AB's, that's just the way it goes.

I think it's very unlikely that Olt makes the big club, I think they'll want him to experience some AAA success and rebuilt some confidence, plus have some at least small sample of success above the AA level. (He's never done anything good above AA.) Otherwise, I completely agree. Between 3B, 1B, DH, and perhaps some LF, I think there are plenty of ways to get both Villanueva and Olt plenty of AB. And while I'm not as sold on Olt's defense as many posters are, I don't think his 3B defense is really the issue. If he shows he can hit, then he's a factor. So getting AB while DH-ing or playing 1B/LF will work just fine. And some time-sharing would not be forever. If he's doing great, then he'll get called up. If not, we won't care how few AB he gets. So having him start at Iowa won't badly impact Villanueva's usage. I don't really see much concern with Iowa being overloaded and short on AB's. Career minor leaguers like Rohan, Anderson, Watkins, Ha, Andreoli, they'll take what they get, or get sent to AA. If Vitters and Jackson both magically turn up healthy and good, terrific. Otherwise, the OF seems like just a grab-bag of whomever.

Thanks, Cal.

Somebody yesterday brought up Hendricks and randy Wells. I think they are quite different in many ways (personality, actual stuff, minor-league success….) But obviously those differences are incidental to the poster's point, I think: Wells was a guy with a somewhat limited arm and he didn't end up very successful. Hendricks might be another guy with a limited arm who is likewise not going to end up being very successful. Hendricks may very well be overwhelmed by the talent and power of big-leauge hitters. That said, though, I'm not sure that Wells really demonstrates the principle. Wells was quite good as a rookie, with a 3.05 ERA. I think his arm wasn't the same thereafter. I think he's more an example of how a guy with limited margin really can't afford any arm problems. But I'm not sure that had he stayed healthy, that he might not have been a reasonably useful pitcher. Wells is probably Hendricks-ish in that he had anti-awful HR rates when he had his successful rookie year, and they were still OK the next year when he was OK. But by his 3rd year, his HR's had elevated to 23HR/135 innings. Disaster level. At the minor-league level, Hendricks has had solidly limited HR-allowance rates, even though scouts don't seem to quite understand how or why. If he can keep his HR's at a modest rate, I expect he'll be good, since he's not going to walk a lot. But if he fails, I expect we'll see that his HR-rate will be way worse in majors than it's been in minors. Which seems to often happen with limited-stuff guys.