toonsterwu

I was suggesting the former, although it doesn't read that clear looking at my post. (that is, not that he deserves the benefit of the doubt, but that he gets the benefit of the doubt). For all the rumors about a future of Rendon at 2nd and Espinosa at SS (leaving aside whether or not Rendon can play 2nd full-time), there's still a heavy under-current of rumors/spec that the Nationals value Desmond so highly that they would rather not make the decision as of now.

Both Tennessee and Peoria should be awfully intriguing, arm-wise, to start 2012. Barring a surprise, I think McNutt will be at AA, along with likely Rhee and Antigua. That's fairly intriguing in it's own right, and we can't rule out Whitenack, Beeler from that combo (although I tend to think another lefty gets into the AA rotation, perhaps Jokisch or Raley). Peoria should have a lot of our high upside arms there to start the year. Iowa might be the weakest grouping of prospect talent (relative to level) of intriguing rotation arms to start 2012. Struck, Jay Jackson, Cabrera, Casey Coleman, Chris Rusin offer some decent names for Iowa, a more prospect laden group than in year's past, but with minimal starting ceiling (and 1 or 2 of those guys probably get sent to the pen, as a loser in the big league rotation could slot here, or someone emerges). Struck probably has the most potential of that group, but that's end of the rotation with a mid-rotation ceiling. Daytona isn't bad, just a bit more unknown. I think Beeler probably gets sent there, but AA can't be ruled out. Cates should fit in there, but whether it is the pen or the rotation is a fair question. Loosen's probably in that mix. A lot of soft-tossing lefties could fit in there - Austin Kirk probably tops that list, but Del Valle/Rosscup/Hicks could fit there. Perhaps Harman if they try him as a starter.)

Rob, whether fair or not, I think there's a slight difference in a Lake v. Desmond comparison. I think that there's always been a sense amongst scouting types that Desmond had the tools to play an above average short and they hope that he puts it together defensively. Lake's best defensive assessments still suggest that he's better off moving. I understand that you are simply comparing career paths, but I guess what I'm loosely trying to say is that Desmond gets some benefit of the doubt on his defensive, and so you hope a guy with his offensive tools and defensive potential put it together, whereas with Lake, really, for all the focus on his shoddy defense, it's his bat that is going to make or break the day for him, and he won't get the benefit of the doubt/extra looks on account of position (if this makes any sense at this late/early hour). davell - The hard thing with projecting Lake to a super-util type role, for me, is that his swing is the type that needs to get in a groove. Unless they can get him 3-4 starts a week, I think that's going to be tough. But ... guys do adjust.

as Rob noted, the tools are enormous. His defensive work at short has actually improved over the years, and the Cubs will likely keep him at short next year, considering the lack of challengers in the upper levels demanding shortstop time. He just makes some ugly, ugly swings at times, and I mean, he's a case where one stat does show a lot about him - what was the number of games he went with taking a walk? 24? He's an aggressive guy, and when he's seeing the ball, he can put a nice hot streak where he looks like the highly touted Xander Bogaerts, but when he's off, it's ugly. I just don't have that much faith in the bat turning around. I could see davell's suggestion happening - that this is a make or break positional year potentially, but considering age the and the thin levels of talent in the upper levels, plus they added him to the 40, I think they might give it another year barring an absolute stinker of an offensive season.

I only have a SSS on Beeler. I don't think, and this is really layman's language than anything "baseball-y", that his sinker is anywhere near the hard, moving sinker that Wells has (I think Wells has the best power sinker in recent Cubs prospect history, but I recall a lot of people were intrigued with Nagel's, and Berg was touted for his sinker (although I always felt that was a case of a good pitch and very substandard secondary offerings than a plus pitch)). From the side (and I was on business that trip, so while it was a time to relax I wasn't paying a ton of attention), seemed like Beeler had good drop, but not a Chien-Ming Wang (as I watched a ton of Wang), bottom drops out type of sinker (I think Wells sinker is comparable to Wang's in his heyday, but Wang had better command on it - and that's pretty head praise, considering Wang in his Yankees days had one of the elite sinkers in the game, but as everyone knows, I'm far more bullish on Wells than most)). Beeler's secondary stuff is, by most accounts, decent. I don't think anyone is expecting a plus breaking pitch, but I get the feeling that the pitches have some above average potential. Rhee, and don't quote me on this, but I'm pretty sure that he's still primarily a 4-seamer who gets some good late action. I do believe he gets a chunk of his GB's off the split-change. I'm under the impression that he might've toyed with a 2-seamer, or maybe that his 4-seamer looked like a 2-seamer at times.

Well, I think, and this might not be fair, but I think the general perception is that with only an average fastball (to go with his plus breaking ball), Beliveau is viewed more as a specialist/fringe late inning arm, whereas Dolis is viewed as a guy with power late inning potential. I tend to like Dolis higher than Beliveau for that reason (in rankings, not how I expect them to perform), but I don't love Dolis in the top 10, which he seems to be finding a spot in for many lists. I guess it comes down to whether or not you buy what Callis was somewhat selling - that Dolis' lack of K's had a lot to do with working on locating his pitches than inconsistency.

I'd think that they'd try him at 3rd first. Beyond Castro, we have Lake, Hernandez, Amaya, and now Torreyes in the high ceiling(and DeVoss and Watkins in the not quite as high ceiling) MI department. Beyond Vitters, we really don't have much of anything at 3rd depending on your feelings toward Cerda and Contreras. In general, while I'd selfishly like to see Baez/Hernandez at the same level, I think you tend to keep a guy in the middle infield as long as possible, particularly at short. The only person that is legitimately pushing Baez at short in the low levels would be Hernandez, as Amaya and Torreyes are slated at 2nd (and in Amaya, perhaps 3rd), and if they feel Baez has any slim chance to stick at short, it might be worth it for them to groom both guys at short in the near future. on a total side note, too bad mlp isn't around here. damn knowledgeable guy. wonder if he still posts at Miles blog post-changes.

Raisin - I was under the impression that he was asked to dial down his velocity to gain better command. He did wear down a bit relative to stuff and innings, but that was often primarily due to pitch counts that arose from inconsistent command. craig - I should be clear. By no means am I suggesting that Wells is better off throwing that power sinker at 94/95, as the general indication seemed to be that he didn't have the best command on it at that velocity (should be noted that a power sinker that can hit 94/95 is awfully fast). I expect him to sit a bit lower than that, and work in that "classic power sinker range" of around 91-93 perhaps. I would note that using those stats to judge his velocity probably isn't the best way to assess the velocity. The secondary pitches were too inconsistent for him to get K's with, and I can't recall too many power sinker guys that racked up huge K rates off of the sinker. A more notable stat on the effectiveness of the power sinker is probably his 63% GB rate (along with the consistency he got GB's - didn't have a single month below 60% GB at Boise), to go with the 3.16 GO/AO ratio. As for Whitenack and Wells, I think we're talking about things from slightly different angles. A power sinker at 92/93 is generally considered fast for that pitch, and considering Whitenack was able to hit that, he definitely had a "fast" power sinker. I wasn't trying to diminish the improved velocity on that pitch - my only point there was that Wells had hit higher velocities on his power sinker.

I think he could be okay in LF. He's relatively athletic for his size, and the old reports from his prep days suggested an above average arm. Not ideal, and not sure he'd be even average in LF, but probably not horrible. That said, if we do sign Fielder, which I doubt, but if we do, I think there would be plenty of teams that would offer up an intriguing enough package for Rizzo to be their first baseman (Indians/Rays/Orioles come to mind) that it would be better for us to trade him.

I tend to think Fielder is going to end up with the Rangers or Nationals, but I'd be perfectly fine if the Cubs swooped in with a 6 year deal with a one time opt out. Actually, I've been posting for awhile that the opt out may be the best possible move for Boras - it could allow Fielder to get a huge payday within that 3 year span while hitting the market again in his prime, a la the intent of the Furcal deal with the Dodgers when he chose them, which could allow Fielder to get 5-6 years at 30 years old. That's probably Boras' best bet to get a combined 8-10 years for Fielder, but it obviously assumes Fielder stays healthy and continues to perform. If you can get Fielder at an affordable length, I think it's a solid move, as it allows you to potentially shorten the time length to being competitive, as you suddenly have a definite impact bat AND you have Rizzo as a trade chip. Much as Theo, Jed, and Jason like Anthony, I don't know if they'd pass on that situation if Fielder came at the right length in the same way that Theo eventually dealt Anthony for Adrian Gonzalez. All that said, still not expecting it, but I do expect that whoever signs Fielder will end up doing it with a creative deal (just watch me turn out to be wrong) where there's perhaps an out-opt, with maybe some options tagged on the backside as well.

I think they are pretty content with their pen. Joba will come in around mid-season to lessent he load on Robertson/Rivera. Betances/Baneulos could be up at some point to add to the pen.

Meant to type until then. Obviously they'd do it if we took Soriano's contract and ate Burnett's, as they could cut Soriano whenever.

Somewhat a side note, as O_O made a fantastic post with little to add, so just some various comments/opinions. - Still wonder about Jay Jackson in the pen. Saw him hit 90's this year (I know there were some reports of velo drop, but I didn't see it), and I wonder if a move to the pen, with less of a focus on command and more focus on stuff, could allow him to find a consistent breaking ball. - Somewhat think Alberto Cabrera is almost a bit forgotten. Understandable reasons why, but 2011 followed the 2010 pattern - he needed time to adjust to a level. Still has a low-mid 90's fastball and a breaking ball that can be nasty at times. I just don't think he's a starter, but I am fairly curious about him in the pen. - I doubt they'd do it, as he held his own in AAA, but a part of me thinks Nick Struck would be better off starting in AA and working on secondary pitch development. There's still some untapped potential here, although he's still more a 4/5 guy with a tiny chance of being a touch better (velo is solidly in the low 90's and can hit mid-90's occasionally). - Is Blake Parker somewhat forgotten in our pen mix as well? I'm not so sure he couldn't have a season or two in the bigs where he looks like a good setup type guy. - might be one of the only ones that cares a bit, but mildly curious how David Cales looks on his return next year. Looked like a decent pen arm in development, albeit one whose ceiling was limited. Also curious if Marcus Hatley can become a dominant late inning type, something the old leadership seemed to buy. - IF Brett Wallach is with us next year, and there's no guarantee of that as he's 23 and is fighting for a spot in Daytona, I might be curious about his development as a power pen arm. - Still a bit more intrigued with Antigua than the reviews from lists this year. I know some that said his velocity seemed a bit better this year (not significantly better to alter any quick scouting report write-ups). The AA rotation could be intriguing next year. - Fairly curious how Loosen looks next year, probably in A+. Didn't get a good read on his stuff this year. Reports out of college were mediocre on stuff, so the expectation game isn't being set high. - Two guys I wouldn't completely sleep on yet - Robinson Lopez (who I wasn't as high on as others, but he was trying to make mechanical changes all last year supposedly) and Graham Hicks (although this may be residual interest on account of seeing him a couple years back). - Somewhat feel like Luis Liria might be the over-looked arm amongst the young LA arms. A lot of focus on Peralta, Jose Arias, Rosario, and others, and for justifiable reasons. But Liria does seem to have the makings of 3 above average or better pitches sooner than later, and if the command comes, he could be fascinating. Somewhat reminds me of Alberto Cabrera a couple years back (not physically, just electric armed guys who had better secondary options than some of their peers at the same level who might have had a tick better fastballs - even in Liria's case, he hit 94/95 at times in 2011). - my intrigue, excitement about Ben Wells is well known. I was never as high on Austin Reed as others were last year, but I'd keep an eye out on him. Let's see if he can find some consistency, but he can get guys to pound it hard into the ground, and a power sinker guy always gets my attention (sadly, so did Jon Nagel ... although IIRC, injuries hurt him). - Kyler Burke might be the single most fascinating arm next year for me because of what he could be and his age. - Favorite arm from this past draft was probably Jensen, but he might be slated for pen duty. Maples has the highest ceiling, but a good sleeper to watch may be Francescon. Ceiling is a bit limited, as fastball is average for a righty, but could move fairly fast with a "3" ceiling. - Jose Rosario is the power arm to watch in the lower levels, hitting upper 90's while showing potential on the breaking ball (slider off the top), but another power pen arm that intrigues me is Charles Thomas. Rosario has some starting potential, but boy, I don't get a great feel that that's going to happen. Just a gut feeling there. If they make the decision that he can't make it as a starter, he could perhaps move fast as a pen arm. - I think AzPhil was touting Brian Smith? Hunter Ackerman has to get a move on it. Seems doubtful to expect much. IIRC, Pugliese had decent-solid pre-draft reports. There were 4 prep arms of note in 2010, and I wonder if Hartman/Richardson can build on some improvement they showed last year. They are still awfully young kids. - I still don't get all the Tony Zych love, relative to where I have him listed (outside of the top 30). Velo's nice, sure, but Jose Rosario has good velo. Almost all the reports agreed that his breaking ball was below average. This isn't to say he couldn't improve it - just befuddles me why people have him fairly high when it's fastball velo, below average breaking ball. - And still a bit disappointed that Justin Bristow never built upon the intrigue he showed 2 seasons back.

craig - Ben Wells velocity wasn't notable last year? His power sinker could hit 94/95 in game. The issue was that he dialed his sinker down to more 92/93 area to get better command on the pitch, but the power sinker at 94/95 was still fairly solid. He supposedly could run a 4-seamer a bit higher. I mean, we're gushing over Whitenack's velocity improvement, and he was only starting to touch 93/94.

They reportedly still have money to spend, and the hot rumor of Carlos Pena makes some sense. I don't think they are going to want to be contractually tied to a DH through 2014, not with Jeter/ARod aging, unless the Cubs ate the whole Soriano deal and took on the Burnett deal. Until then, going one year at a time may make more sense for them with FA DH pick ups.

I still wonder if the next move might be a Ryan Dempster trade if he's willing.

WSR - Unless the Red Sox give us an all-in package, and they reportedly have said Bogaerts and a few others are off-limits, I don't see a package from them that I really love for Garza. Ranaudo as the pitching centerpiece is ... eh. As for this deal, stunning. My first thought was, highway robbery for the Yankees. Then, the more I pondered it, the more I think that it's a good deal for the Yankees, but I can understand it for the M's. Pineda has an injury history, and he's basically getting by without a change-up right now. There's still more developmental work in some respects, but his fastball/breaking ball are so electric that he can get away with it for now. They've got young pitching in the system (Hultzen/Walker/Paxton trio should, IMO, get them at least 1 quality 2, 2/3 type and probably soon), and Montero, to go with Smoak, starts to give them the young offensive pieces to build around that they simply didn't have available. Don't get me wrong, overall, I think the Yankees slightly win this for now, but there's enough there to understand why they went this route.

Not surprised by Bianchi being let loose. It was the most obvious move to make and a fairly easy guess. I did mildly think that they might cut Corpas first, but eh. It's not like he was substantially more valuable than, say, Edgar Gonzalez, and Bianchi likely would've been ticketed for AAA. If we really need an emergency MI, we can call up an Edgar Gonzalez type during the season. Wouldn't be surprised if another of the signings that got people in an uproar (Corpas perhaps - well, not uproar, but there was more than enough posts on a tiny signing like Corpas) was released to make room for Kerry when he signs.

Nice all-in signing. solidifies the back end of the pen, putting Marshall in arguably a more useful role as a fireman type. Truffle, I believe they are going to shift Aroldis Chapman to the rotation for 2012. Or at the least, give him a long look in the spring.

Ouch, for me, that's tough. While I personally am a gigantic fan of Crosby, he is a big risk, with his injury history and his command woes. Oliver feels like a pen arm, and Smyly, I feel like he's a Travis Wood type, a possible 4/5 that can have good years where he is a solid 3. It'd be tough to say no to that as well. 3 solid ceiling upper levels arms are tough to turn down. I don't know. Gut feeling? Probably yes, depending on what the 4th (and perhaps 5th) pieces to the deal were.

Ding. I agree with this - I think this might be a case (having read that they want 4 top prospects) where going last seemed like a great idea - Garza is the last big dog on the market, but following the 4 player package that Oakland/San Diego got for their guys might be tough. The system thins out fast for Detroit, and a lot of their intriguing 2nd tier guys are recent draft picks. Mike Newman, in his fangraphs chat, suggested Turner/lefty/Fields is approachable. I think I'd be fine wit Turner/Smyly or Crosby/Brantly/Fields (or someone comparable, not the biggest Fields fan).

aren't those three (turner/castellanos/smyly) their top 3 prospects? i feel like if you're making a deal where you give away your three best prospects, you should be getting something better than garza and barney. two of the three would be reasonable, with turner obviously #1. 3 of the 4. Depends on how one views Crosby in comparison with Smyly. I guess Oliver loosely fits in the mix, so maybe 3 out of their top 5.

I have high, high doubts that Barney is the difference between us getting Castellanos and not in a Garza trade. I'd imagine that it would take someone/something with better ceiling to get them to let go of Castellanos and Turner (assuming Goldstein is right).

Yeah, neither of those two should be a hindrance to a trade (outside of uh, Samardzija blocking it, but speaking to what I feel about it in general) if the right, quality package is offered. Actually, DeWitt shouldn't be worth a 2nd thought. Shark ... maybe, but still, if that gets you a 2nd high ceiling arm, and a 3rd intriguing guy (Brantly or another arm would be my picks), then okay.

That would leave the team with Gaub, Maine, and Beliveau as the LH RP on the 40 man. LH RP shouldn't exactly be an organizational priority, but still, ick. As ugly as that is, if that led to a better return package, I'd be all for it.