toonsterwu

I don't think he's necessarily handcuffing the new GM, particularly if the contracts are done in a way that they can get out of it, but I think it's a bit unnecessary and a bit backwards, and as it pertains to organizational development, may cause for some potential in-house issues (all organizations are obviously, unique, but there has been enough evidence shown in the past that such actions taken by top management can lead to disruptions in whatever hierachical structure of the organization). It's certainly possible that, in the end, these actions may simply be a gold watch for Fleita and Wilken. Furthermore, as Passan noted today, this sort of action may turn off some possible GM targets. What GM is going to love the idea of getting rid of guys that his owner likes? They may do it in the end, but it certainly leaves a bad taste. May be much ado about nothing in the end, and I like Wilken enough, but it just seemed, as noted above, unnecessary and backward.

I'm fine with Wilken, but I think Ricketts is acting irresponsibly by committing to them first. Sure, the contracts may be structured in a way that they could get out of these deals, but any new GM is going to know that these are guys the owner wants. He should get the GM in place, have the GM feel things out with Wilken and Fleita. I'm glad Ricketts is being pro-active, but this is a bit much.

Well, someone should tweet him and let him know that his ridiculous walk rate is unacceptable, even in the pen. I like the arm, but honestly, I didn't want him back up. I thought it was time for him to take a break and try and regroup for next year. I didn't think he even really deserved that first call-up. I really am at a loss on what to think about LeMahieu. Prior to his call-up, there were some positive signs, as reports suggested he was driving the ball better. Then ... AAA, he seems to be spraying things around a lot more. I hope the Cubs are right and that power comes, but people have been expecting more power since he was in HS, and it's been a long time now. If he could play 2nd well enough defensively, then it wouldn't be as big an issue, but the general feeling seems to be that he can only be a stopgap type of 2nd baseman, not an everyday guy. If working on his power is a goal this offseason, then he might have to bulk up some more, and that might reduce his chances of playing any meaningful time at 2nd. A question to be asked has to be whether or not he'll contribute enough pop at 3rd to justify regular playing time. Even a .140-.150 ISOP, which is still more a dream right now, is very borderline and we'd need more power from other spots (of course, the hope would be that Starlin adds some more pop).

Well, it certainly is possible. I don't recall that much concern about his conditioning, but one thing to be said is this - the kid is/was still growing (looking at recent pics ... I doubt he has the frame to add on that much more good weight ... bad weight is obviously always possible). That can be quite exciting in one respect (love a pitcher with a big, strong frame that can handle workload), but it can also be troubling if he fails to adjust to his body's needs and demands as it pertains to keeping in shape. ______________________________ I'm going to be curious how Mark Johnson and Casey Kopitzke are viewed by the new GM. Before, there seemed to be signs that both were liked enough by Hendry and Co. to be groomed as possible guys to work their way up the ladder. Casey, unfortunately, had a fairly weak squad to work with all year in Peoria. Of course, with Fleita still around (I guess that isn't completely guaranteed if the talks about his contract structure are right), maybe not that much changes in how they are viewed, but it'd be interesting to follow.

Shame. I guess I'll stop going to the Daily Herald's site now. Bruce's blog was the only reason I went there, since I'm not in Chicago. Anyhow, here's hoping Bruce keeps up his exemplary work and shows up on Cubs sites like he always has. For my money, one of the best sports writers out there, due to his willingness to interact with the fans.

Despite his self-inflicted problem to start the year, I'm still actually fairly pleased with Golden's first full year. Here's hoping he learned his lesson and is in shape next spring. Some tinkering, and I could see him really take off. Here's hoping.

Which is too bad because it also could eliminate any possibility of seeing Ben Wells in another big game this year. I'm so interested in seeing what he will do next year. His record might not seem gaudy, but for a 18 year old (19 on 9/10) in shortseason, I'll take 4-4 4.66 ERA and a roughly 3 GO/AO any day. My hope for him next season is to see him get a handful of games where he makes it through 6/7 innings and surpasses the 100 IP mark without any trouble. My primary concern for him this season has been conditioning-related, as it seems he has been excellent in many of his outings up until about the 5th/6th inning, when he tends to fall apart. I'm not quite as sold on his upside as toonster is, but even if his ceiling is that of a 3rd starter with a power sinker and the ability to pitch 180-200 IP in a season with a WAR around 3, that's still pretty darn good. I've been under the impression that his struggles have less to do with conditioning, and more to do with inefficiency. Off the top, there were at least more than a handful of games, I think, where his pitch count was awfully high by the 4th/5th (I'm almost certain I remember one game where he was at 80+ pitches in the 4th.) A lot of that can be attributed to his inconsistency with his secondary stuff, and the fact that, on occasion, the fb runs from him. I don't recall much concern over his conditioning, other than he was a big boy who was getting bigger. It might be an issue down the line, but was there something about his conditioning that I just don't remember right now?

Which is too bad because it also could eliminate any possibility of seeing Ben Wells in another big game this year. I'm so interested in seeing what he will do next year. His record might not seem gaudy, but for a 18 year old (19 on 9/10) in shortseason, I'll take 4-4 4.66 ERA and a roughly 3 GO/AO any day. I'm huge on Wells. He's got nasty action on the fastball, and if he learns to command it, on that alone, he'll have a shot to make the bigs as a pen arm. That said, I've heard enough reports on his secondary stuff that I still buy he has TOR potential (to be fair, had a discussion on his ceiling on Sickels site the other day, and yes, I would agree, as of now, he's more a workhorse mid-rotation profile, and everything depends on how the secondary stuff develops). There's a lot to be intrigued with, particularly since the kid grew into his power late last year, and this year, he's gotten bigger, and I haven't heard any issues with his work ethic.

The shame of it in the NWL series is that the top two starters there aren't available, with Wang headed back to the National Team, and with Wells one day off schedule wise. I don't recall what happened to Cruz off the top right now. I had mildly wondered if they would've contemplated sending Liria/Peralta down for some work, but I guess they opted against it. Kurcz blowing that one hurts the D-Cubs chances, but overall, the game was a positive simply to see Rhee continue his strong late season push. Kurcz, for my money, is still the top pen arm in the system.

Rhee's giving us a pretty good start against Dunedin. 6 h, no bb through 5, 3 K's, 1 run on a solo homer.

Too bad Ben Wells is one day away from starting. Here's hoping Joe Zeller and the staff can force a Game 3, and we'd get Big Ben on the mound.

to be fair, there really wasn't any reason to call Jay up earlier. I don't really care for Rodrigo either, but Jay was going through his fair share of struggles earlier in the year, and I'd rather the organization, in a lost year, have a kid develop some more than bringing them up early. As to now ... considering how well he finished, I'm actually not against the idea of giving him a start or two for a look-see, but I don't get the feeling that it will occur.

Well, there's two things I'm looking at a) What is the likelihood said player picked will stick in the bigs all year? I have high doubts that Junior Lake is capable of sticking in the bigs all year in 2012, at least, long enough so that the team can stash him away at IR (I forget the rules off the top right now). Defensively, what position does he play on a regular basis? Does he offer enough offensively? b) What's his value, and what's his value to the organization? I don't deny his talent, but there has to be big questions on how his bat translates, and defensively, he's still likely destined to go to a position (2nd or 3rd, if he develops) that demands more offense. I'm just not sure, in a year where there are a lot of guys that deserve to be in consideration to be protected, that Lake is absolutely necessary. If I could protect him, sure, but protecting 8-9 guys in one year is a high number, and I'd rather protect Antigua, Flaherty, Beliveau, guys I'm either more intrigued with or believe there's a higher chance they will contribute in the bigs. But that's me, and like I said, in all honesty, I'm expecting them to protect him and I'd also understand the rationale behind it. Hatley had TJ, I want to say, in late 09? I'm not suggesting Koyie Hill btw. I'm simply suggesting the team might opt for a veteran catcher that is better than Soto defensively. I'd rather let Castillo/Clevenger battle it out, though, with the other in AAA.

The expectation with Geiger is that he's going to add some to his frame. He isn't viewed as a good runner, and as he gets older, he might get slower as he thickens a bit. The hope is that he can continue to stick at 3rd, but even in HS, most expectations were that he'd be shifted to a corner OF/1st role. I was a bit surprised he was jumped to Peoria, as he didn't seem like a kid who was ready. I expect he should be there to start 2012, unless someone passes him in the spring. That said, he's got a higher ceiling than guys like Hoilman, so I'd prefer to see Geiger stay put. I saw Beeler earlier this year, and he wasn't doing much with the change. He's going to need that in the upper levels. With his solid control, the fb/cb should be enough to dominate Low A, but that change needs to come around. I think, more than position, Silva's biggest issue is that, I question if he has the skillset to survive with that high a number of K's. That said, not sure if you caught BP. Supposedly, and I've heard this from several people (including mlp over at Bruce Miles' blog), Silva shows a surprising amount of power in BP (perhaps relatively speaking, but not sure). With the numbers in CF, his best chance is really at 2nd. Wallach as a power arm is intriguing, because some of his problems came about when he was trying pitches besides the fb/breaking ball. If he can focus on those two, he could be intriguing. That said, a lot of guys with a similar profile. I mean, mid-90's with a decent/intriguing breaking ball, but erratic, describes Blake Parker (and Alessandro Maestri from before), and he's a guy who just hasn't been able to get over the hump to force us to use him.

Pretty much what I had the last time we discussed this, with the one difference being Lake not being in my top two groups I would rather not roster Lake, but I think there's a high chance that the Cubs will. I am fascinated with Kyler but I think he's too far away to take the plunge with right now. Would it stun me if someone took a shot on him? Not really, but it would be mildly surprising. The one key sleeper, I think, is Marcus Hatley. Of course, IIRC, there were heavy rumors that the Cubs were high on Luke Sommer last year and were pondering him as a possible protect, and now he's gone. That said, the Cubs do seem high on Hatley, and unlike Sommer, Hatley does have some late inning potential. I've got a hard time seeing 8, let alone 9, get protected, though, but he's the one sleeper I'd watch. If there's a guy from the top two tiers that might not get rostered, the favorite would be Clevenger. I like him and prefer seeing him protected, but the club could opt for a more polished defensive catcher behind Soto. As with all things Cubs system related these days, the one big issue is that there's going to be a new regime, so a lot could change. Granted, if Fleita/Wilken are in place, maybe not.

As a total side note, I've heard enough positive stuff on the potential of his slider to think that he has the potential to be a TOR type guy, but to be fair, right now, Wells projects more as a workhorse type, middle of the rotation arm. Slider has to be more consistent, he has to harness the sinker a bit better, as he gets some high pitch counts when he can't do that, and a 3rd pitch has to develop (is it a splitter or a change, off the top, I want to say splitter, but others seem to say change). But with that movement on the sinker, if he has a plus slider and a solid change, we could be looking at something special. Here's hoping ...

nah, I googled Liria and changeup and found out where the early reports of his plus change (that I recall) were from, and that was AzPhil. I do wonder if we are underrating Liria's potential ceiling a tad. he has some more physical projection, enough so that seeing him hit 93-95 consistently is quite possible, and the reports on his slider are awfully good.

hey raisin, the Santana reports are from when he signed, right? Or are they newer? I just remember when there were early reports touting Liria as a plus change, but it's been a decidedly average, at best, pitch, this year.

I didn't really think Smith would stick that long with us (that is more than this year), in all honesty. He's a decent arm, but we have enough decent upper level middle relief arms. I guess I could see him back next year, but there are enough options that it really isn't needed. Abreu was the lottery ticket gamble (and I don't like Abreu either ... still, the deal was for Fukudome).

uh oh ... sure sounds like Beeler got hurt again. Anyone hear anything? Came in and was suddenly replaced. On the plus side, Thomas had a solid 2 innings of work. Ben Wells with a solid start: 7 ip, 3 h (1 solot shot), 2r, 0 bb, 1 hbp, 5 K's, 14:1 GO/FO. Searle with a nice start as well: 6 ip, 2 h, 1 unearned run, 3bb, 4K's, 2 WP, 1 HBP, 13:1 GO/FO.

The reports on Cerda at 2nd are below average. It's part of the reason why the Cubs haven't given him a ton of work there. I haven't seen enough to get a good feel for why he's below average (simply haven't seen him enough when he has played 2nd) - you would think that, physically, he has enough range to handle the position.

intriguing start for Luis Liria - 6ip, 3 h, 2 bb, 2 R, 9 K, 3:4 GO/FO so far. Cerda's error led to 7 unearned. Ugh. If he could be decent defensively at 2nd, he'd have a better shot, but right now, looks like a system guy, despite his age (only 21). So far, the typical Ben Wells start (7:0 GO/FO through 3). If the secondary pitches come around and get more consistent ...

I'm expecting that, for at least his first few years in the bigs, his batting average is more likely to float in the .230 to .250 range than .265 or higher. .240/.315/.375 for 2012, I'll say. Then again, I'm also expecting the Cubs to try to get him to alter his swing to cut down on the strikeouts, for him to lose some power in the process, and our coaches to start telling him he should be more aggressive and just put the ball on the ground and use his speed. Everything these days comes with the caveat that there will be a new regime, but as to how this regime was operating, I wasn't expecting them to alter his swing drastically at this stage. I actually think he has a mildly similar issue as to what David Ortiz had coming up, a minor hitch on the inside of the swing (to my naked eye), and Ortiz was able to fix that with a good coach without anything being impacted. My expectation for 2012 ... I'll take a stab (assuming regular PT in the bigs) and say, .250/.330/.400.

This may be the homer in me, but right now, McCutchen's line is .271/.371/.469. My median expectations for Brett Jackson have always been roughly .265-.275/.360-.370/.440-.460. Don't get me wrong, I think McCutchen is a far better talent and in time, could possible put up even better lines than this, but I'm not sure why Goldstein found the comparison of what BJax could do a few years from now vs. McCutchen now as lopsided as he seems to think it is. This is also McCutchen's first solid year according to UZR numbers, and most have BJax as an average to above average defensive player. So I'm curious ... are my expectations too high for Brett? I'm curious what other people are expecting.

Thomas is intriguing. Electric stuff, by most accounts, but has to get some control to have a shot. I still remember him as a bat.