toonsterwu

One of the more intriguing things is to see which Cubs prospects may benefit as a result of new leadership making evaluations. One guy that comes to mind is Ryan Flaherty, a guy that the old regime seemed to like, but didn't know what to do with. Tim, have you seen the Laurila interview with Headley? http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/qa-chase-headley/ He changed his approach to try and fit the park. Now, there's no guarantee he could make new adjustments and find a level of consistency, but considering the raw power that he once showed, I'd be very curious if he could find a different, but equally effective, balance.

I don't think so either. Certainly, any team trading for Wright will want a window to negotiate, and the Mets would likely grant one as they would want to maximize their return. I guess the problem is that the Mets are going to value him as a star player, while other teams are going to question how much he has left in the tank. Alderson and Co. don't seem like the type that would bend to public pressure for the most part (he really hasn't for most of his history), and Wright is their one chip that could net several quality assets to accelerate the rebuilding process while cutting costs (they have some solid pieces in Ike Davis and several arms coming up the pipeline, a couple decent-solid positional assets). Alderson's a pretty savvy guy when it comes to things like this, and I imagine that he'll let most teams know that if they don't meet his price, that he'll simply wait until mid-season. I tend to think that someone may pony up enough - there's enough teams out there searching for 3rd basemen this off-season and the value of Wright is high right now since he can void the 2013 option if he is dealt, which Wright will likely try to use to steer himself towards a situation that he likes. One darkhorse I wouldn't rule out - the Red Sox. Youkilis may be forced to DH, and while Wright isn't a good defensive player, it might be a risk they are willing to take. I could also see the Tigers get aggressive in this, and the Rockies seem like a team that might ponder it becaue Arenado is so far away and Stewart is such a big question mark. Of course, the Angels will probably be in on it as well. Whoever doesn't land Aramis may push harder for David Wright. I have my doubts on how aggressive Theo would be in pushing for Wright, but I imagine we'd be in it. On a personal preference note, I'd rather push hard for Headley and see if the Padres would budge than push hard on Wright.

Well, there's some differences. Johan was in entering his age 29 season when he was moved and had shown signs of steady decline in his final years in Minnesota - the K rate was declining, and so was the fastball velo. Felix is just hitting his prime years and has a better frame. That said, one does wonder if the workload will catch up to Felix sooner than later. But more importantly, there's 3 cost-controlled years of Felix on hand. Whether or not he deserves Starlin Castro is one question, but if you are Seattle and looking at us right now, Castro is about the only guy that would really entice them, IMO, to give up 3 cost-controlled years of Felix. Maybe I'm wrong. But 3 cost-controlled, even expensive, years of Felix in his prime is going to have them wanting a huge return, and I'm not sure this system has those types of chips right now. Next offseason, this is a completely different story. If some of the low level guys break through, we might be in a better position to try and move on Felix. He'd be a year older, with that much more workload on him.

I tend to think they will eventually deal him. It's a deep system in quality pitching, as the trio of Hultzen/Walker/Paxton look very good, and Michael Pineda looks like a potential stud. If only one of the trio develops to go with Pineda, they should be fine, and if more than 1 develops, then they are in a good spot. That said, with Felix signed down for 3 more years as of now, I think they take a look to see what their young offensive guys do in 2012. There's some interesting pieces like Smoak, Ackley, and, to a lesser extent, Seagar. They just aren't in a rush to deal Felix, who will net them top end talent next offseason as well. But if there's some stagnation amongst their key young positional talents, and assuming their three young minor league starters look solid, I think they move Felix in the next year (either midseason or next offseason) and try to land a boatload of positional guys.

Encarnacion seems to be getting a lot of attention. That said, for guys that focus as much as they do on run prevention, I wonder if Encarnacion's shoddy defense makes them wary. This is assuming that he even reaches FA - doesn't Toronto own a club option on him at an affordable price?

They do focus on defense, but their sheer offensive needs and Castro's upside should lead to Castro starting the package from their perspective, simply because there isn't enough quality in the upper levels to make a deal. I mean, most of the teams, if not all, would offer some of their top prospects for Hernandez. Much as I like aspects of our system, we simply wouldn't match up. If the Yankees came in and offered Betances or Banuelos, to go with Jesus Montero? Or the Rangers came in and offered Jurickson Profar since Elvis Andrus is in the bigs (or what if they offered Elvis Andrus to keep a spot for Profar, but Profar is a few years away)? We simply don't have that elite talent, or that close to elite upper level guy. Brett Jackson is as close as it gets, and Cashner is a big question mark right now as to his chances to be a starter.

I really don't buy Seattle moving him this off-season. If they are willing to listen, though, I imagine it starts with Starlin Castro at the top of the package. Without him, I don't see anyway that the Cubs could be competitive in a deal. Scary how young Felix is. He's only entering his age 26 season, and it feels like he's been around forever. Do you move Castro in a package for Felix? It really depends on how good you think Castro will be and when you think he will have to move off short. I tend to lean no - as good as Felix is, Castro's a positional player who looks like he could be headed to some stellar seasons sooner than later and is cheap and cost-controlled. I just don't see anyway the Cubs could make a competitive bid without Castro in it, though. There simply isn't enough to legitimately buy that the Cubs could make this deal. Even Cashner headlining a package probably wouldn't be enough (granted, if the Cubs said pick any 6 or 7 guys, maybe they'd ponder it).

Headley is still my preferred A option ... but they have only 13.55 million on the books for 2012 as of now, 32.3 million below their 2011 numbers. There's 6 arb 1 cases and 5 arb 2 cases, with Headley as the most expensive. Even if he gets a surprisingly high raise, they are still likely to be below their 2011 payroll starting number when including him. There is Heath Bell out there, but it doesn't seem like they are in a financial bind of some sort. Talent wise, the argument for moving Headley has always been their 3rd base depth. But Forsythe is a fringy bat for 3rd, Darnell might not stick there, Blackwood is a fringe prospect, and Rincon might not stick and is far away. That leaves Gyorko, who looks at least a good season away. Add in that Headley is their best offensive player, a guy who made adjustments to his swing because of his home park, and a guy Hoyer wanted to build around, and I feel like Headley might get quite expensive. Assuming Brett Jackson is untouchable, it wouldn't surprise me if they demanded McNutt and Szczur to make a deal happen here, and considering the market for the postion, I wouldn't blame them. At the very least, I would assume that they would want an upper level arm to headline the deal (their arm depth is more in the lower levels, although Keyvius Sampson looks awfully good).

Stewart would be a fine gamble, but he has one major issue in that, he's an aggressive swinger who doesn't really have great contact ability. This isn't the best measure of things, but he's increasingly swinging at more and more pitches outside of the zone but his contact rate on those swings is sub 60%. I mean, of qualified batters this year, only 3 guys, at a quick glance, swung at a 32% or more of pitches outside of the strike zone and had a sub 60% contact rate on them (Mike Stanton, Carlos Gonzalez, Peter Bourjos). For comparison's sake, Starlin Castro swung at 33.1% of pitches outside of the strike zone, but made contact on it 70.8% of the time. Is this correctable for a guy at his age and development? I don't know, and I don't have time to search to see if there are any studies done. A very quick glance of the Red Sox rosters didn't seem to show many guys who had rates similar to Stewart. That said, this is just an awful third base market, and if Stewart is available, I think you ask about the price and see if it's workable. I get the feeling that he's going to be a much talked about name this off-season, but may not get moved unless the return really forces them into action. After all, the Rockies top 3rd base prospect, Nolan Arenado, is probably at least a full year away in a positive scenario, and more likely, perhaps close to 2 years away, assuming all goes well. _________________________ The Ramirez situation, so far, definitely shows in a clear way that a new regime was in play. One got the feeling that, more time than not, in a situation involving potential arbitration guys that the Cubs didn't want and could net them picks, that the Cubs would "do right" by the players. Instead, Epstein is doing right by the organization. If they accept arb, the difference between what it would've cost, as noted above, isn't much, and if they don't, and Aramis leaves, we get a pick. Granted, a supplemental pick, but this is doing right for the organization and the fan base that cares. _________________________ If there aren't any solid young 3rd basemen that can be attained (Headley, Stewart), I'm perfectly fine going with a Jeff Baker/platoon combination. I mean, I'm intrigued a tiny bit with Kevin Kouzmanoff, but not that intrigued to think he's a better option than Baker/platoon. I doubt the Cubs push that hard on Aramis - I'd guess that they'd make him an offer, akin to how Theo made Nomar an offer (granted, Nomar wasn't a FA at that point), but I doubt it'd be close to what market value might get Aramis, and I doubt he'd get more than 3 years from Theo. __________________________ I do wonder about two things - a) Might they pursue a minor league 3rd basemen? For example, I'm not huge on Will Middlebrooks, but he can pick it at 3rd and could be a Joe Crede-esque player (may not be the best comp). I doubt the Red Sox move him, but it's not impossible. Or maybe pursue someone on the Padres (though I doubt James Darnell can stick at 3rd ... it's not like the market is offering better). b) I still think back to Theo's first moves with the Red Sox. It was really more a pieces to the puzzle approach. It's a far different situation here, as he doesn't inherit the strong core he had in Boston, but I do wonder if he tries to follow a similar approach here and looks heavily at the non-tenders, perhaps plucks a couple guys in Rule 5, and perhaps pursue a couple 2nd tier FA's. Gut instinct says we still push hard for a Top FA, or two, but I wonder. Granted, Phil Rogers (enough said) and Kevin Goldstein (not sure how connected he is to the Cubs or Theo) aren't exactly guys I pay strong heed to when it comes to their statements about the Cubs actions (but it does catch my eye), but both seem to think that the Cubs will pass on a big ticket first base item. Then I also think about Theo's final days in Boston. He knows he put them in a bad spot, and I wonder if that experience may impact how he pushes forward this off-season. ____________________________ One final thought that doesn't really fit here - We know they pay a strong focus on medical assessments. I wonder if Darvish's and CJ Wilson's arm actions are things that may concern them in regards to making a long term commitment. ____________________________ Only thing I'm certain of? No one really has a clear idea on what Epstein and Co's plans are and that will make this off-season all the more exciting.

I could see us pass the Padres after 2012. It's obviously really tough to project right now. I'm assuming we're talking system ranking-wise. Both systems are likely to lose some key assets at the top, Brett Jackson for us, and Anthony Rizzo for the Padres. The advantage for us, IMO, which gives us a chance to pass them at this ridiculously early speculative stage, is the higher number of higher upside talent in the lower levels that are hitting the A ball ranks to start next year. The chances of a few more breakouts seem likely, while some of the top Padres lower level guys have had breakouts or good years this year, or are recent draft picks so may be a year or two from a breakout (but then again, you never know). That said, some would argue that the Padres lower levels are well-stocked with upside talent, with guys like Rymer Liriano and Edinson Rincon. Anyhow, here's my issue with the Padres system, not that we should get too deep into them. 1 - I tend to think some of their hitting talent gets overhyped off of Lake Elsinore and Tuscon numbers. Neither are great HR parks, to the best of my recollection, but both have good gaps, allowing fringe/average power guys to look better than expected. Guys like Jon Galvez, Jason Hagerty are guys that I have high doubts will look anywhere as good offensively, in AA, as they did in A+. Logan Forsythe took advantage of Lake Elsinore. 2 - Who really, really excites in that system? There's Rizzo. There's Keyvius Sampson. There's Rincon, who lacks a defensive position. There's Rymer Liriano, who is far away (he may be a monster in A+). I'm not nearly as high on Fuentes' upside package as a lot of folks seem to be. Is there any reason to be superbly high on Casey Kelly right now? Donovan Tate was suspended for drug use. James Darnell may have to move to a corner OF role. Jedd Gyorko and Cory Spangenberg have limited power. I think they are ahead of the Cubs, as a system, right now because there's a few more intriguing pieces in the upper levels, and Keyvius Sampson looks like a potential top level pitching talent, and when you combine that with their depth, it's a top 10 system (the gap from, say, the 5th/6th system to the 21st-23rd system, IMO, doesn't feel like much. If I had to go a top 5 in that system entering 2012, I think I would go, hmm, this isn't that easy as I just realized Rizzo isn't eligible anymore. 1. Keyvius Sampson - Before anyone says SNTS, I think his stuff is simply that notch better than Kelly's that I'm willing to overlook the 2 level difference and difference in readiness. 2. Casey Kelly - Close to ready, but upside isn't nearly as good as once hoped. 3. Rymer Liriano - I don't know I really like him here, but boy, he looks like a potentially exciting OF talent. 4. Michael Kelly - I think I like what I've read about his stuff moreso than Joe Ross. 5. Joe Ross - Looks like an intriguing upside arm. The top of the system isn't great, IMO, and I think Brett Jackson would, for me, easily rank 2nd in their system, if not first, but their depth is a factor here and pushes them up.

My issue with Spagenberg is with the over-hype. Again, not saying he's a bad talent. He's an intriguing talent, potentially useful if he can stick at 2nd long term (the reports were mixed). He was excellent in Northwest League. The reports out of the Midwest League weren't as high. Still positive reports, but a lot more lukewarm than the effusive praise out of the NWL. I want to see a) Can he stick at 2nd? I had some mixed reports on his defensive ability there? His fallback is assumed as CF, but the pre-draft reports that I recall seemed to question his ability to go there. b) How his discipline rates hold against tougher pitchers? Was he simply tired in MWL? Perhaps. But he's not going to have a lot of power, so he's going to need to have a strong approach.

Two quick comments as I haven't skimmed this thread in a long, long time - a) Keeping Zambrano is the most sensible move from a talent perspective. We simply won't get enough savings on any Zambrano deal (if any probably needs to be tagged onto that), and Zambrano, at worst, is still a decent 4th/5th starter who has occasional flashes. The question becomes if removing Zambrano at all costs will improve the team more than his value as a 4th/5th starter, and that's something that we can take some guesses at, but can't know for sure (and while there's new people in place, there's still a lot of the old guard left around, and how Ricketts feels about keeping him is another factor). I tend to think keeping him for the start of the season is the best course of action, and then if he causes problems, you just cut the cord and move on. I highly doubt we'll get any significant savings in any offseason trade, and it's better to take a risk to see if he can provide some value and perhaps deal him midseason. b) The Olney quote is interesting - the full quote suggests that asking for two top prospects is too much (which also blasts a hole in the idiotic commentary on the Red Sox boards that still seem to think the Marlins legitimately gave two top prospects for Ozzie). It, though, doesn't say anything about giving up one top prospect. Someone noted this a few posts up (or somewhere else) - I tend to think this is a deal where both fan bases may end up unhappy if it heads to Selig. Of course, Olney could be speculating or making stuff up and have no real basis for his speculation, but it was an interesting thing that caught my eye.

I think their system is really good, but a bit over-hyped right now. That said, it's great depth puts them in the top 10 easily. I'm not all that big on Spangenberg or Gyorko, to be honest (at least, relative to some of the hype out there - I think both are solid assets, but some folks have really hyped them up). I've never been as in love with Casey Kelly as many folks out there.

I wanted Gordon last offseason as well, and I would've given him another look at 3rd. That said, I don't think there was ever any real indication that they were going to move him or open to it. From what I recall, it was a lot more speculative guesswork by folks than actual rumors, but perhaps time is making me forget. The Gordon of this offseason is probably Ian Stewart. I think there's a chance he might get moved (and I'd be interested in him), but Colorado probably doesn't do it unless they have a solid upgrade in place, and well, the 3rd base market sucks. Unlike, say, the Padres, they don't have a quality 3rd base prospect ready (Arenado is a couple years away). I don't see Stewart's underlying performance as solid as Gordon's was heading into last year. I'd be plenty willing to take a chance on him, but I wouldn't be as excited about him as I was on Gordon last offseason. Well ... Gordon (last offseason) had never shown the type of power he did this year. Stewart, on the other hand, had shown good power, home and away, prior to 2011. That said, Gordon was a far more disciplined hitter than Stewart and didn't reach for pitches as much out of the zone. In Stewart's favor, though, is the fact that he plays a fairly solid 3rd base. I mean, besides the Moustakas factor, Gordon really wasn't that good at 3rd. Anyhow, I feel like Stewart won't get moved unless it's a big deal. Could be wrong. If we're going with a big deal, I'd rather go after Headley first.

I wanted Gordon last offseason as well, and I would've given him another look at 3rd. That said, I don't think there was ever any real indication that they were going to move him or open to it. From what I recall, it was a lot more speculative guesswork by folks than actual rumors, but perhaps time is making me forget. The Gordon of this offseason is probably Ian Stewart. I think there's a chance he might get moved (and I'd be interested in him), but Colorado probably doesn't do it unless they have a solid upgrade in place, and well, the 3rd base market sucks. Unlike, say, the Padres, they don't have a quality 3rd base prospect ready (Arenado is a couple years away).

On Kemp - I don't think we'd have the chips to trade for Kemp, and I imagine the Dodgers would try to focus on building around Kemp/Kershaw, and try to move other parts to give them space financially. If they deal Ethier to X team, then they can shift Kemp over to RF (assuming they land a CF).

The focus on first base is, understandably, on Pujols and Fielder. If for some reason, we don't land one of those two, for whatever reason, I'm curious what Plan B becomes. It seems possible, at that juncture, that they may try a trade for a young veteran with some potential, but likely wouldn't cost an arm and a leg talent wise. The name that pops up in mind for me would be someone like Matt LaPorta, a guy who has had struggles putting it together in the bigs, but has a solid approach at the plate and good raw power. Were his struggles due to the injury he had (hip?), or was it for other reasons? Another name that comes to mind is Adam Lind. He had some injuries and some bad luck, and DH is a better spot for him overall, but he might be a nice gamble to make a move on if they pass/don't get Pujols/Fielder. Anyhow, just a couple names to ponder if they opt/don't get the big signing. I think that both would likely be reasonable gets in terms of trade cost - Cleveland wants to give Carlos Santana enough AB's at first and would like a righty to pair with him, and Lind is costing them 5+ mil for 2 subpar years. That said, both would definitely be gambles, as LaPorta hasn't put it together, and over the last two years, Lind has gotten increasingly aggressive in pitches outside of the zone and some horrible L/R splits, amongst other issues. Another name that hasn't been discussed that much is Andre Ethier. Now, he's coming off a down year, a year where he was injured, so his medicals would have to pass, but it's possible the Dodgers look to move him to clear some salary and give themselves more room to keep Kemp. I doubt Ethier is going to reach the heights, power wise, that he once did, but he looks like an intriguing fit and still in his prime. Obviously, a lot would depend on the costs, in talent, of trades, but it's crossed my mind, through all the discussions here, whether Epstein might decide to try and land two big FA pitching arms. I mean, if they decide to spend all on pitching, landing say, Wilson/Darvish, that would allow them greater flexibility on Dempster/Zambrano. It's also probably going to be more costly to trade for intriguing pitching talent, even gambles. They'd likel still have enough flexibility, contract wise, to pursue an arm from the 2013 FA class next year. Anyhow, food for thought.

I guess, the one thing with Rhee that is fair game is this - he only had a strong half season. Granted, it was the 2nd half, which is why there was a level of optimism, but he does need to pick it up for more than just half a year. Slider does need to make improvements, but I've heard from folks that the mid-90's is legit (I mean, we aren't talking consistently gunning 95+ as a starter, more like consistently in that 93/94 area without it seeming like he's reaching back). When BA posted that mid-90's in the chat, I was surprised, as I only saw low 90's early in the season. The thing that I'm most excited about, as it relates to Rhee, is that he was consistently working 6 or more late in the year. That's honestly been as big a concern for me as anything - he's not the biggest guy. Assuming no McNutt in the Red Sox deal, and most indications are no as of now, that's going to be a fascinating rotiation to follow in AA (potentially) - McNutt/Antigua/Rhee. There are actually some folks who saw Antigua late in the year that are higher on him than Rhee (heard a couple reports of 92/93 on Antigua on a more consistent basis), but it's just so hard for me to rank Antigua higher considering the odd season he had in regards to the demotion/split-time in the pen. Wow, hadn't heard those reports on Antigua either. That's very intriguing coming from a lefty. I'd add Beeler to your fascinating potential AA rotation. Just to be clear, I don't want it to be misunderstood - I just heard that he was hitting 92/93 more in games (at least, the gist seemed to be more), but he was still largely a 90/91 guy. I think some folks were higher on him because he has has a better 3rd pitch and is a lefty, as I didn't get the sense that either of Antigua's secondary pitches rated as high as Rhee's change/split. It wouldn't surprise me if they kept Beeler in A+, but yeah, he could be in AA. I'm trying to see if there's any new information on Loosen I can dig up. You hearing anything Raisin? The Loosen out of college was more a multiple pitch, average velocity guy.

I guess, the one thing with Rhee that is fair game is this - he only had a strong half season. Granted, it was the 2nd half, which is why there was a level of optimism, but he does need to pick it up for more than just half a year. Slider does need to make improvements, but I've heard from folks that the mid-90's is legit (I mean, we aren't talking consistently gunning 95+ as a starter, more like consistently in that 93/94 area without it seeming like he's reaching back). When BA posted that mid-90's in the chat, I was surprised, as I only saw low 90's early in the season. The thing that I'm most excited about, as it relates to Rhee, is that he was consistently working 6 or more late in the year. That's honestly been as big a concern for me as anything - he's not the biggest guy. Assuming no McNutt in the Red Sox deal, and most indications are no as of now, that's going to be a fascinating rotiation to follow in AA (potentially) - McNutt/Antigua/Rhee. There are actually some folks who saw Antigua late in the year that are higher on him than Rhee (heard a couple reports of 92/93 on Antigua on a more consistent basis), but it's just so hard for me to rank Antigua higher considering the odd season he had in regards to the demotion/split-time in the pen.

I used to think I was higher on Castillo than most, but man, even accounting for draft picks and international signees ... Welington Castillo as the 5th or 6th best prospect in the system? Granted, after the top few, there's a gigantic clump of guys. I see Raisin tweeted him and asked if that's an early preview of the non-draftees portion, and he basically said yes, and it's hard to imagine Vogelbach being ranked that high, leaving Baez and Maples as the two guys with a chance of going ahead (well, Baez is definitely ahead). All that said, "grade-wise", I guess I don't have Castillo all that different from a few guys I have slotted ahead, so may come down to eye of the beholder, and some sort of positional/level acknowledgment. Going to be curious to see Callis' list. I have a feeling BA will likely be higher on the Cubs system than most.

I agree, but like I said a number of people believed the Red Sox would jump into the Wilson running. If Speier is pretty connected as you say, it would appear they're out (though clearly not a certainty) and the Yankees may be focused on CC for a while and may bow out from the elite guys if they have to give CC a hefty raise. I've said from the get-go, the teams I'm concerned about in regards to Wilson are teams like the Nationals/Blue Jays/Rangers. I could see a sleeper team or two emerge (Orioles could throw money, Marlins are a factor, someone's suggested that the Angels could pursue pitching and then turn-around and deal their pitching depth for hitting). For me, the issue this off-season, in regards to the big ticket signees, or at least one of them, is that there are so many teams that have a healthy amount to spend. You don't need your typical teams to get involved to push the price up. Of course, teams could show discipline and surprise.

It would be tough for us to win a Danks trade battle without including BJax, I agree. I'm just really concerned about wear and tear on Darvish's arm and how high that posting fee might go. If we're going to miss on a high end talent this offseason, I'd rather we make sure to get one of the first basemen. For that reason, I'd want to ensure that a posting fee in the neighborhood of Daisuke's wouldn't interfere with the pursuit of Pujols/Prince. marmol for danks straight up- would you pull the trigger on that? i would have to think about doing that. I'd do that in a heartbeat. I doubt the White Sox would do that, though. I imagine they'd counter and ask for Cashner or Brett Jackson to headline a package.

If true, this is one high-payroll bidder out of the CJ Wilson hunt. Speier is fairly legit. Doesn't mean he can't be wrong, but one of the better beat guys out there, and he's known to be solidly connected. That said, I think it was fairly likely that the Red Sox were unlikely to go after a big time FA signee. Just too much money tied up there. The return of Clay Buchholz is as big as anything for them, and they'll likely hope some combination of Alex Wilson/Kyle Weiland and others can fill out some useful starts. I'd look for them to take some low cost gambles on rehabbing talent as well.

My plan is to go for Pujols, Wilson, and Chen primarily, so the high end pitcher would be taken care of. If we were to miss on Wilson, I'd shoot for Danks as well as Chen. I'd also look to pick up Jeff Francis on a cheap, one year deal. I feel like if we miss on Wilson, my 2nd option would be Darvish. A lot of risk, but then again, a lot of risk in this market, and he's young enough to think he has a few years in him. Add in that he'd only cost money, and provided that it fit within the budget, I think it makes as much sense as pushing hard for a trade. I'm also not sure we have the trade assets to win a trade, unless other teams back out (assuming Brett Jackson is untouchable).

Works for me. Man ... looking at the data set is troubling. I don't know how accurate it is ... but he's been largely sub 90 all year on the fastball. Unless the secondary stuff has improved a bit (the slider looked decent from some games I've seen clips of this year, so perhaps) ... is he really that much better than Chris Rusin? I'm asking that not to be an annoying jerk - I'm sort of serious. Granted, he tops out a bit higher than Rusin, as Rusin tops out high 80's.