craig

Have we gotten any scouting on what Maples is throwing at Boise? At draft he was generally scouted as a late-1st or 2nd round talent, and the Cubs obviously paid him as a solid 1st rounder. The projection was for power fastball in time, although I don't think he was amazingly fast then; and for the possibility of a drop-dead curveball. At Boise, he's knocked the walks off, but his K's and hits-allowed are decent but not special, and he hasn't really been showing any WOW 10K/5IP type games. Back at Kane, I think there were a couple of reports; obviously many that he was super wild, but one in which he was low-90's, another that he was high 80's touching 90-91. But nothing incredible. While his walks have vanished, he's still usually having several "wildness" outcomes per game (WP, HBP....), three yesterday. I have no idea what's happening. Maybe they've told him to pretty much throw nothing but fastballs, work on getting a fastball you can throw for strikes this year, and we'll work the curve back in this winter? He wasn't controlling that at Kane, so still a huge step. Maybe he's been told to take a couple mph off, and can control it at 90, but if he tries to amp it to 92-94 he goes wild? Or maybe he's been nicely consistent, but the WP/HBP are occasional relapse pitches, or if he tries to throw a curve? Who knows. I guess I'm wondering if after all the injuries and tweaks, and since he was a projection guy in the first place, whether he actually has ever added velocity, or has the velocity more typical for a 6th rounder than a 1st rounder. And whether his curveball is anything to get excited about anymore. High ceiling? Or just a guy with chance at back-of-rotation stuff?

Heh, when I sometimes read arguments that you're involved in, Kyle, I usually agree with your side, whether I post or not. This is one of the exceptions. Rivero was a very good arm, those guys attract offers, even if they are inconsistent or wild or have crummy mechanics. Teams figure they've got a shot to fix them, and if so there will be payoff. Not sure how sustainable Rivero's recent run is, but might be a nice example. Concepcion was a scouting sign, in a weird way he may remind me a little of Blackburn. Blackburn didn't throw real hard in high school, but showed some hints and had a build where projecting more was possible; he showed more in some spring showcases, and drafted in the first round. He didn't throw very hard last summer or in Mesa, but he flashed a couple of very fast games early in Boise, now I'm guessing he's back to not throwing very hard. But for a young projectable pitcher, even a few glimpses of excellent velocity is enough to stimulate strong interest. I think that's kind of how it was for Concepcion. He hadn't thrown very hard in Cuban league, but he was young and projectable. he hasn't thrown very hard in US since signing. But in between Cuban league and his minor league disaster, the Cubs saw him at a showcase, or I'm guessing perhaps it was at a private workout, throwing 94-95 four or five innings into the workout. Had he done that much/ever before or since, or had any consistency, no. But they saw a young pitcher with a good, projectable pitcher's body, showing at least a flash of a good big-league fastball, and thought he had a chance. If he could get his mechanics more consistent, or grow and strengthen a bit, perhaps that kind of heat could become fairly routine for him, and you'd have a good-ceiling LHP. None of that "flash" has been seen since. And perhaps when a guy is resting and psyching for a workout/showcase for weeks, rather than grinding every 5th day, it's a lot easier to throw kinda fast. But the Cubs saw a flash, and that prompted the investment. In Torreyes's case, perhaps if he was 16 again teams would see potential. An extraordinary anti-K gift, maybe he'll grow 4 inches and 30 pounds, or maybe he'll become good defensively with practice. But now that he's 20, I don't think so. Concepcion could flash a couple of 95's in a showcase and get scouts interested; I don't think Torreyes is going to show up at 6'0" at any showcases. Right now I think scouts pretty much know what he's got in the toolbox, and without any chance for power, speed, or excellent defense, I don't think a one-tool contact hitter would generate a lot of interest.

Alzolay's been really, really good. Lists at only 6'0", though, so not a lot of RH 6-foot power pitchers. No info other than the stats and that he wasn't a notable dollar signing. No problem with Cabrera move. He'd pitched 130-140 innings each 2 and 3 years ago, so not sure how much innings concerns factored. Probably just an effort to find some role where he might make it. I'd thought there was the chance that maybe he'd really explode this season and dominate AA, but that didn't happen. He wasn't especially impressive, and certainly hadn't justified much claim to be a big-league starter. 3.20 ERA for a 24-year-old 8-year vet in AA is nothing special. Lots of HR's as has been his career norm, unexceptional WHIP, a 2.6 K/BB isn't "wow". He's got a chance to make it as a 7th inning type guy.

We are basically paying Soriano a lot less to play for the Yankees than we'd be paying him to play for us. We open LF for other younger and more long-term interesting guys, whether Lake or somebody we pick up this winter. And we're getting a good-armed prospect. Good armed prospect, a bunch of free millions, and some opportunity to improve in LF this winter. Win-win-win.

Wow. Wow wow wow wow. Seems so totally un-cublike to do something radical and kind of outside the normal boundaries. $1.6 to Tseng, but $3.2 expense for Cubs. They obviously like him. Heh, that's maybe half of what we sold Soriano for. Soriano for Black, Tseng, and a PTBNL? (If we sold Soriano for $6+, maybe the other $3 can be used to buy another $1.5 international prospect?) With Tseng and Jiminez, there is no way to stay within penalty, correct? I think that ship has sailed. But, I think reaching an agreement and getting it finalized with the mlb office may differ. There may still be time to add INT slots, and reduce the dollar cost.

Do you guys know what's become of Blackburn?

That would be great value. I don't like Olt at all, so if they could replace him, whether with a position guy or a 3rd pitcher, I'd like it even better. But the third guy is a throwaway. The first two would be outstanding value for 2 months of rental. If they get both Edwards and Jackson, I'll consider that a wonderful deal. Way better than I would have dreamed we could get for Garza six weeks ago.

ABTY clarified this. "Incredibly" probably doesn't belong in there, it's misleading. By his account, the bids are in from a number of teams, and the Cubs was competitive enough to be the highest bid. Given the competition, having the highest bid definitely means it was strong. But, by his account apparently a group of bids are all pretty close. So while the Cubs must be in the mix, they aren't sure to get him. So it doesn't sound like the Cubs bid is "incredibly strong" in that they are blowing the others away. Rather, sounds like it's strong and the highest, but may be close enough that Gonzalez might prefer a warm-weather city or a contending team or something like that. He's got to choose, it's not like with the Japanese where the highest bid wins.

I'd guess he'll play in 2-3 Mesa games before going to Boise.

OK, maybe that was a little unfair to Penalver. Who knows what a kid can become later on, we can imagine or project pretty much anything we want to dream, I guess. But all scouting reports have agreed: not even the most optimistic envisions any power for him. He's got 24K in 107 AB, so while he has and projects no power, for now he's K'ing like a slugger, while slugging like a Pierre/Barney. He's carrying a .518 OPS this summer, and hitting .196. He's only 19, so it's possible, but he's got a long ways to go to blossom into a Barney-type offensive guy. Lots harder to be a .600+ OPS in the majors than a .518 OPS in short-season.

If only Pugs was lefty, he'd probably seem more interesting. As a righty, not so much. If the NL adopts the DH, maybe Penalver could become a prospect? Let Wood and Samardzija bat, and DH for Penalver? He's young, so I suppose anything is possible. But it looks like he'll need to improve a lot offensively to blossom into a Paul Bako or Steve Lake type bat. Probably ridiculously unrealistic to think that he could blossom into a Barney-type offensively. The note on Dunston going opposite all the time is interesting, and seems to fit. I've heard that he has or projects some power, perhaps more than his father. But he hasn't shown much. Thanks for Masek notes. Sometimes it's hard to know what to think with some of these college arms. I'm not sure how built up some of them are after their summer vacations.

Thanks, ctcf. That's pretty nice review on aa. The comment that his throwing mechanism looks better for 2B than SS, I'm not sure I understand , but that's really encouraging. Caution, of course, is that having a beautiful BP swing involves hitting straightballs. I suspect Alcantara's high K-rate reflects that he's got some limitations that won't be evidenced in bp.

I'd take the 20 on that bet.

Please check my replies from last year before saying everyone. Agreed, there were plenty of posters last year who observed that Olt struck out like crazy and was a high-failure-risk prospect. And it's not like having another year of struggle since shouldn't be allowed to influence ideas. The premise with prospects is that they'll get better with experience. When they don't, it's good reason to drop the arrow on them a whole bunch. Unfortunately the Cubs have had lots of prospects who were supposed to improve with experience but didn't.

Agree. Third guy, fine. "Advanced" guy so they can more easily justify a trade in which one of the two primary guy is in A-ball, great. But he's such a remote long-shot in my book. Jackson, Ian stewart, we're 0-2 lately on those kinds of guys. Maybe it's time to get Olt and finish the strikeout.

I'd like John Garcia.

Wil Remillard, the good defensive catch-and-throw catcher with no bat who was drafted in the late teens, has apparently tweeted that he's signed.

This is a good point. I suspect that BA has pretty good access to mlb sources, so my guess is that what they report is pretty much accurate. But what comes from Boras might be different. Perhaps Bryant has a $6.7 deal, but $250 of that is for dental school? Who knows.

Over his last 4 outings, 21-year-old Austin Reed has 10K/1BB/4hits/10 innings, no runs. 4 outings isn't much for a guy who's been chronically wild and hittable with no K-pitch. But you never know.

You can see why players love Boras. He's got nothing to work with, every logic says the Cubs should have been able to get Bryant for a lot less. But somehow Boras plays tough, the Cubs give in, and Boras gets an incredibly good deal. Boras is the best, there is no doubt about it. I'm really surprised that the Cubs gave in so far. I suspect this also reflects the Cubs either not being honest with themselves in terms of what Boras told them in their pre-draft discussion; or else Boras not being honest. I'm pretty certain the Cubs thought they'd essentially had an agreement on a price prior to the draft, and that's why they thought they knew what they had to work with in terms of Clifton etc.. I'm pretty sure Boras changed his story after the draft from what they thought he'd agreed to before the draft. Regardless, as Kyle has noted, usually you'll win or lose with your top pick. Bryant will define this draft, not Clifton.

AJ Morris has been good as a starter. No HR's helps, even though his K-rate isn't great.

Peralta in August. Do we know what happened with Peralta? INjury, or reworking his messed up mechanics, or what?

The "smartness" involved, of course, involves paying $2 per dollar. You need to outbid the market to get a guy in the first place, so you're paying $1 mill for guys that other teams won't pay a million for. With the tax, you're paying $2 million for guys that nobody else will give a million for.

Thanks, David. It was horrific, over a one-month sample. Now it's improved back to bad, but it's staying steady at bad. I guess it's something. I guess I've been perceiving it as consistently bad, with some of the ups and downs that happen with all hitters but don't necessarily mean anything. He had some K "ups" in April, and he had a week in June that was an anti-K "down". Maybe it means something, but maybe those are just some of the routine highs and lows that every hitter goes through, and the overall picture gives as good or better a picture than either April or June.

It may be that this season is a fluke. But this year Alcantara's been really good LH, and I hope that's not a fluke. He's never been especially good RH, and has never had power RH. Alcantara's career is sub-.700 as a RH hitter, with .374 slugging and only 3 HR career. If we were just looking at RH Alcantara, I don't think we'd be that interested in him as a prospect. It's the LH power that makes him a prospect to become a quality big-league starter.