craig

The original scouting report in Muskat had "87-92 mph". That Washington traded him for Hairston fits with their not thinking he was very fast. http://muskat.mlblogs.com/2013/07/08/78-scouting-report-on-pineyro/

I'm with you on this one, Kyle. (Well, not enough to vote for him here, but enough to be VERY interested.) Not sure why being 26 should really be held against him. That his Cuban situation interrupted his baseball career at age 22 doesn't impact his talent. If we moved him back in time three years and made him 23 again, would that increase what talent he does or doesn't have? I don't see the "ceiling" concern, either. If you've got a big fastball and a 13.4K/9 breaking ball, that suggests that he may have the stuff and the baseball talents to be a very effective big-league pitcher. That he didn't use those talents for several years doesn't change that. I have no idea how he'll turn out, who can do more than guess? He'll not be the first guy with a strong fastball and a sometimes sharp breaking ball who can't locate the fastball, or control the breaking pitch with any consistency. He may be too wild to ever be any good. But with a big arm and some good coaching, maybe his splitter will develop into a deadly pitch, and he'll throw enough strikes with enough consistency to become a very good reliever. Maybe soon. 30 minor-league innings can't prove either way.

I have Black way ahead of Pineyro, based almost totally on fastball. My info may be faulty, but my perception is that Black is very fast and has a plus fastball. I think that may be true both for the velocity, and perhaps also some life/movement on it. Every report on Black has seemed to have the plus-velocity report. My perception is that while Black's fastball is plus, that Pineyro essentially has a minus fastball. I think he's more on the Hendricks end of the spectrum, fastball-wise. Obviously control goes a long way, and PIneyro seems to have that. Maybe I'm underestimating his velocity; maybe Johnson can work with him and he'll end up with perfectly average fastball velocity/life. Combined with good control an average-velocity fastball can be big-league effective. But my perception is that he's working with a lot less stuff than Black. But, maybe my info is wrong and he's not really all THAT much slower than Black.

Ha was well off my top-40 before this, but I almost think it's encouraging. Maybe a bad wrist is why he couldn't hit and had no power? Maybe if he really does get it fixed, and he's more competitive healthy than he showed, maybe 5th OFer is not beyond his reach someday?

I'd probably have lake back a few names, still. Blackburn, Zastryzny, Black, Rivero, Jiminez, Tseng, Rivero, possibly Maples, I might still have behind all or most of those guys. He's still only 23 years old, though, and he hasn't had his current height/size/strength for that long. I think there's a chance that he will continue learning to hit with more power as he gets more accustomed to playing while being physically mature. 15HR, or better, for a fast, good-fielding outfielder, he's still got a chance to be a pretty useful player.

This is off topic, but if Lake was eligible for ranking, where would you guys have placed him? Would he have been on the list at least several spots ago? Would this maybe be the area where he'd be showing up? Or would he still be some names down your lists?

Theo explaining that: "I think it makes sense if you are going to give that kind of security, the club should get a benefit in return." If the player wants the security of a guaranteed multi-year deal while he's pre-FA, the team getting FA year(s) balances the benefits. But the option(s) are a distinct benefit, of massive significance. For an agent to give a team a club-option, he needs to be getting something very valuable in return. Significantly enriched per-year guaranteed salary? Considerably enriched salary during that option year, with an enriched buy-out payment if the club declines? A club option is too valuable for an agent to concede that without getting something pretty player-favorable back to balance those values.

Jiminez, Blackburn, Zastryzny Tseng might be a good one to add.

hey, way to go, Tim. These are fun. And a nice forum for thinking about and discussing guys who aren't all at the top of the discussion list otherwise. So, glad to see it's back.

Geiger has a shot to be a serious HR guy. If he was a name guy or played a defensive position, we might look at his numbers pretty favorably, and his progress. But, he's not a name, and defensively he's a 1B, so his odds are slim. As befits a guy at spot 31. Being RH doesn't help with the Cubs, either. Depends on the HR power, I guess. Last year he hit only 17 HR, which is nice but not a ton; the previous year he'd hit 17 in less than 70% as many AB's. Tennessee is a HR-friendly home park, so if Geiger does continue to improve, and perhaps has a little better luck, I'd not be surprised to see him him 25 HR's this summer. So I understand how BA is interested. But Lockwood, that I don't get at all. Hopefully they and the Cubs know something we don't, and he's going to be a really strong OBP guy going forward while playing snappy defense.

Cates, Lockhart, Beeler, some surprises

I actually like listings that source from Cub scouts. Because I think the Cubs talk and think and analyze and know stuff about their people more than anybody else does. And because the opinions the Cubs have most dictate the decisions the Cubs make with regard to their prospects. From that angle, I thought it was encouraging that this guy is so up on young pitchers Blackburn, Underwood, Tseng, and Maples. The Tseng as a 96-mph with good slider/curve/change blend sounds pretty good. The bit about Underwood with a plus-plus curve is also interesting. I don't get that, really, or see how it jives with his performance last summer. Wouldn't you think that a guy with a plus-plus curve would be a swing-and-miss pitcher in Boise? A plus-plus curve should be a good wipeout K-pitch; yet Underwood had very low K-rates. Not sure it really makes sense. Maybe his control is so poor that he just never gets to two-strike counts? Or his curve is so sharp that hitters don't even chase with two strikes, so they all just go for balls?

Sounds like a scout's list with scout's comments, written or verbal, written/revised by Loxas. Also sounds like it's coming from somebody inside the cubs. What scouts outside the Cubs would: 1. have any opinions about Trey Martin? 2. have had multiple conversations with scouts about Jen-Ho Tseng? 3. Be so positive about so many of the Cubs prospects?

Yeah, it's all a question of scouting.

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.