toonsterwu

It did seem like that Jericho got the short end of the stick by moving up to A+ and not getting enough AB's to establish himself. I am a bit surprised that they just outright released him, instead of asking him to try pitching. Maybe they did ask and he rejected it, for all I know. IIRC, Jericho was a pretty intriguing pitching prospect in his own right.

Something's wrong with my computer, so for some reason, I can't copy anything and am admittedly too lazy to flip back and forth to type up the entire link, but over in the BA chat on the Appalachian League today, Matt Eddy was asked to compare Jiovanni Mier and Hak-ju Lee, and he turned to Conor Glassey for the answer, with Glassey preferring Mier due to potentially better defense and potentially more power.

I think McDaniel should repeat. If he's going to be tried as a starter again, then it's Daytona. If they keep him in the pen, I guess I could see a chance of him going to start at Tennessee. That's me, though. I'll be mildly surprised if Searle isn't up at Tennessee. He could use more Daytona time, but gut feeling says Tennessee.

I'd love to see the Cubs jump into this, but unless the price drops dramatically, I'm not expecting it. But if it does drop, to say around 1 million, it would be a nice gamble to make, provide he works out well and the issues aren't glaring enough to worry.

I think it's a case of working out of the pen. As a starter, most reports had him pegged in the high 80's/low 90's, occasionally touching mid-90's. A lot of folks got giddy over his AFL work last fall, when he was flashing mid-90's more, but that was in short stints, but this year, most reports had him down low 90's as a starter again, so I imagine that his is a result of reaching back a bit more out of the pen and letting it fly.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/online/prospects/rankings/league-top-20-prospects/2009/268915.html Nice to see a Darvill note. I'm terribly fascinated by him, as he's really got a nice swing, good footspeed, overall solid athelticism. Interesting that they note that Darvill lacks the arm. I was under the impression that he had solid arm strength for short. Guess not.

He actually does have some pop, but he's immensely raw according to AzPhil. Been tracking him since DSL. On a side note, I'll be curious if the Cubs bring Albert Hernandez across next year.

I'm sorry that I didn't recognize that I needed to spell it out, but in saying top of the order bat, I was emphasizing the degree to which said individual gets on base. Again, you look at the Cubs lineup, and one glaring issue this year with the lineup, that is far different from the league average, is a top of the order bat that gets on base. To not acquire a top of the order bat would be failing to maximize the team's potential to succeed next year. Top of the order bats don't necessarily get on base at a high rate. People put bats at the top of the order because they are fast or make lots of contact. Lee and Ramirez get on base a lot, but I don't think anybody would call them top of the order bats. Instead of spellling it out, what you have done is make something overly complicated. Say they need a guy with high OBP. You are right, I should've qualified in the initial post that we need a top of the order bat with a high enough OBP, but as to the rest of the response, you are making my point for me. Again, what I've emphasized in the last two posts is that you can't simply say OBP in of itself isn't enough to fill the Cubs need because the Cubs need someone at the top of the order. As you note in your example (Lee/Ramirez), simply having a high OBP isn't enough to fill said role, but you oddly limit the response to saying OBP is all we need (last sentence). In that respect, you are making it overly simplistic. Let's take an example to illustrate the point. I think you've acknowledged that we need something ahead of the middle of the order bats. Let's leave that open for now. There's a current smattering of "Let's get Akinori Iwamura" out there on other Cubs sites, with the idea being for him to leadoff. People will point to his capable enough OBP and his past experience leading off (although his OBP leading off was never that good ... .344 if I recall correctly). Is he passable? Sure ... but this is only slightly better than Theriot level passable as a top of the order bat. I wouldn't want Iwamura at the top of the order unless we're in dire circumstances ... like ... this year. He strikes out too much for my tastes at the top of the lineup, and he lifts the ball too much (leaving aside his mediocre defense and his age for now). Making things more complicated shouldn't be a negative in this situation. We need more than simply a high OBP ahead of the middle of the lineup bats. Now ... if you are okay with an Iwamura at the top of the order and find it alright ... then fine, I'm making it more complicated, and I think you are making it too simplistic, and we can leave it at that.

What does that mean? And why would the Cubs makes matters worse by spending even more money to get even less production? If you are trading Bradley and picking up the tab, you have to get quality back. If you are getting nothing back, you have to get the other team to pay the salary. You can't get crap back + pay more money. That fails to recognize the market. Simply put ... we're probably going to have to eat money to make this trade happen. I know all the metrics, seen them (1.2 WAR right now for MB this year) ... but 2/21 is left on the deal, and when you combine that with the baggage that MB brings, the Cubs just don't have much power. It's a simple power dynamic issue from basic negotiations. Now, you can't prepare for unexpected variables, so maybe there's a team out there that is willing to pay Milton's salary, but a reasonable, educated guess right now is that is a fairly unlikely scenario at this moment in time to expect. This doesn't mean I want Rowand. I don't want that deal. We're better off eating MB's contract completely than taking on a bad deal. It means that expecting another team to pay the tab is probably a bit unlikely. Also, as noted, I don't think the Giants would open a CF hole for themselves to have to address this offseason unless they get something else lined up.

I'm sorry that I didn't recognize that I needed to spell it out, but in saying top of the order bat, I was emphasizing the degree to which said individual gets on base. Again, you look at the Cubs lineup, and one glaring issue this year with the lineup, that is far different from the league average, is a top of the order bat that gets on base. To not acquire a top of the order bat would be failing to maximize the team's potential to succeed next year.

You're going about it backwards. Find a guy who can play a position and hit/get on base and worry about where to bat him later. IMO, the Cubs don't have many options and even less room to maneuver. I think many of us would like to upgrade at SS, the Cubs don't. They aren't doing anything in LF, 3rd, 1st, and C (likely, unless Lou is really pissed at Soto). What does that leave? RF, CF, and 2nd. Fukudome isn't going anywhere, although I would look to trade him first. He's basically a platoon player making full time salary. If they move him to RF his value is significantly diminished. Then the Cubs will have to find a suitable replacement in CF who can both hit and cover a lot of range. If they leave Fukudome in CF they have to find a RF with power. A much easier task, but made significantly more difficult if they have to pay most of Bradley's salary to get him out of Chicago. Then there is 2nd base. I'm guessing Dan Ugla although he's having a terrible year. He's a trade/DFA guy in Florida as he's about to make 8 million. They are in a real bad place for the next few years unless some of the farm hands progress quickly I don't see how I'm going about it backwards by suggesting that, at some point, the Cubs have to find a top of the order bat ... somewhere. Simply amassing talent in of itself wouldn't do any organization or team justice if the pieces don't fit. This isn't some sort of intangibles discussion - it's inherent for any organization to find players to maximize the team's potential, and to not acquire another top of the order bat would be rather flawed by the Cubs. Batting order doesn't matter. Getting on base does and that's what I am saying ... so I still don't get your point. Simply using your statement would be flawed as it doesn't recognize the degree to which getting on base matters, and that's why I emphasized a top of the order bat. I'm not sure how much simpler I need to spell it out.

Why would Baltimore want him? Their OF is set. What they need is a big time slugger. I also don't see MacPhail putting Bradley with his prized youngsters. Of all the teams out there, I still think the Mets are the best fit. I know not many want Luis Castillo (although he's still a decent top of the order bat who runs the bases fairly well for his age), but we likely have to take back a bad deal if we make a trade (along with eating money). Minaya may be desperate enough ... they are talking about adding an OF bat anyways, and they've been rumored to be wanting to go after Orlando Hudson this offseason (not sure why they wouldn't prioritize adding a pitcher first, but that's not my concern). Nothing's ideal ... but that's the one swap that makes the most sense to me out of all the names that have been bandied.

You're going about it backwards. Find a guy who can play a position and hit/get on base and worry about where to bat him later. IMO, the Cubs don't have many options and even less room to maneuver. I think many of us would like to upgrade at SS, the Cubs don't. They aren't doing anything in LF, 3rd, 1st, and C (likely, unless Lou is really pissed at Soto). What does that leave? RF, CF, and 2nd. Fukudome isn't going anywhere, although I would look to trade him first. He's basically a platoon player making full time salary. If they move him to RF his value is significantly diminished. Then the Cubs will have to find a suitable replacement in CF who can both hit and cover a lot of range. If they leave Fukudome in CF they have to find a RF with power. A much easier task, but made significantly more difficult if they have to pay most of Bradley's salary to get him out of Chicago. Then there is 2nd base. I'm guessing Dan Ugla although he's having a terrible year. He's a trade/DFA guy in Florida as he's about to make 8 million. They are in a real bad place for the next few years unless some of the farm hands progress quickly I don't see how I'm going about it backwards by suggesting that, at some point, the Cubs have to find a top of the order bat ... somewhere. Simply amassing talent in of itself wouldn't do any organization or team justice if the pieces don't fit. This isn't some sort of intangibles discussion - it's inherent for any organization to find players to maximize the team's potential, and to not acquire another top of the order bat would be rather flawed by the Cubs.

Why would the Giants create a CF question for themselves to add Milton? I'm not so sure that they would do that deal.

Bradley + prospect(s) for Meche while swapping salaries (Meche: 10: $12; 11: $12 - Bradley: 10: $9; 11: $12) Then look to deal Lilly or Z for a right fielder Meche was decent in 07 and 08, but struggled this year. However, he was hurt this year so he might rebound next year. He's 30, so he's getting up there, but he's not old enough to expect him to fall off a cliff. It might not be a great option, but it might be better than most. I really don't anticipate the Royals dealing Meche. I think that Dayton Moore is hoping to somehow fix his offense this offseason and add a SP to the mix.

Even before the Milton suspension, I was hoping for an upgrade in CF next year. I believe that should be a primary focus (along with finding a top of the order bat), but the options are fairly slim. One name that would intrigue me, but would be extremely hard to pry away, would be Nyjer Morgan (before people go on and on about how unrealistic that is, I'm aware of it, but I'm also looking at Nyjer's age and that the Nats are still building ... I believe Rizzo would listen, but it might cost too much to be worth it). Two other names come to mind that have been bandied out there as guys their teams may potentially shop - Curtis Granderson and BJ Upton. Both of these would, to say the least, be costly, even coming off years. Would it be worth it? It obviously depends on who it costs, but one thing to note is that the system is in an in between phase, a phase where value judgments needs to be made. Those are obviously the preferred options. There's probably a couple more that could fit the mix, but in the case of Granderson and Upton, the Cubs would need to find a top of the order bat at another position (namely, MI). I've pondered names like Julio Borbon and Eric Young Jr., but I have a hard time seeing the Cubs go with a youngster in a critical spot to start in 2010. I wouldn't be aghast at a Sam Fuld/Reed Johnson platoon, but I imagine most would be disappointed. Shame Fuld got hurt. If we had to go with Fukudome in CF again, that would mean searching for, likely, a top of the order bat in the MI and a potential middle of the order bat for RF. The problem with that is that it would likely cost us a lot, either in money and talent, and the likelihood is that the org has to clear money to make that happen.

I'm just not sold on the Yankees rolling into the World Series. I picked them entering the year ... but if Daisuke is back in form, that's a mighty scary team if their pitching is rolling. Right now, I'm expecting another Yankees/Red Sox series for the ALCS ... and I think I'm leaning Red Sox even though everything would suggest Yankees. I guess I'm not sold enough on the Yankees pitching ... although fully aware of the fact that AJ Burnett could turn it on at any moment. Over on the NL side, a lot will depend on the matchups, but I think right now, you gotta like the Cardinals and Phillies to match up in the NLCS. Dodgers pitching just worries me. For now, I'll guess a Phillies/Red Sox World Series. Not sure who I'd pick to win that ... but it should be a fun postseason.

I think that presumes that the Cubs were going to have strong leverage to make a MB trade this offseason and that there would be enough of a market for Milton's services. Thing was, I'm not sold the market for a guy like MB would ever be as big as his talents, due primarily to his baggage, but also to his mediocre defense and injury history. As such ... I don't have a problem with the decision, and reading the players comments on the decision, where no one really rallied to Milton's defense (keep in mind that, in previous stops, it was always said that, despite the baggage, his teammates would rally for him), and there's a part of me that wonders if it happened too late. With 2/21 remaining and rumors starting awhile back that we were going to shop him this offseason, along with the aforementioned reasons, we were going to have to eat a chunk of the contract anyways. We'll likely have to make a bad contract swap now, along with eating some money. It wouldn't stun me if we had to swallow the deal and DFA him as a result. Nothing's ideal in this situation, but if the teammates aren't rallying around him and he's being a problem, well, if they can't find a deal, then you move on.

I only know the stuff from last year was he peaked in the low 90's on the fastball, with solid sink, along with a solid change/curve. From the interviews, it sounds like the kid knows what type of pitcher he is and pitches accordingly (won't try to overdo it and blow guys away ... basically, pitches to his stuff). There was talk about him working on a cutter/slider type pitch, which would be a big help IMO by offering a different view, so let's see how that goes. He's more of a mid-end of the rotation type projection. That isn't meant as a negative (I mean ... even in weak markets, FA costs for mid-end of the rotation arms will still be high enough that if you can save internally, that's a huge boon). I probably overrated him last offseason when I did my lists on another site (ranked him 12th on a Cubs pitching prospects list I did), but he's been quite impressive this year. A lot of people seem to forget that he was pushed rather quickly as well. Right now, I think he's probably outside the top 5 for Cubs pitching prospects for me (the top 3, Antigua/Searle), but he fits in thereafter for me.

I don't think about comps that much, so I'll ponder it some, but I think Lee would likely be closer to Figgins than Castro, and that Castro would likely be closer to Roberts than Lee (again, not comparing them, as I haven't pondered it all that much ... ), at least, relative to offensive ability. Most expectations are for Castro to develop some pop down the line, as he physically matures.

Was there a site that did loose translations for J-League stats into MLB stats? I seem to remember there was a site, but in a few minutes of googling right now, can't find it.

Not to argue the relative merits of these guys. I personally have Cashner ahead of Jackson, but the point of this point isn't to argue the relative merits. [i can certainly track the argument for putting jackson higher: the big-leagues are no different from A+ in that you usually put people away with the breaking ball. It appears that Jackson's slider is superior to any breaking ball that Cashner throws, as is manifested by his much stronger K-rate. it can also be reasoned that he has better control overall. If jackson goes through his career with better control and a much better breaking, he'll end up better. So I'm not really contesting your relative ranking.] My point is that your discussion of these two does not address a most important characteristic for them, or for any pitcher: the propensity to allow HR's. I don't have numbers, but I believe around half (perhaps more) of the run scored in the major leagues score via the HR. And in this regard I think Cashner and Jackson are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Cashner has allowed one HR this season, I believe in his first game; jackson has allowed 11. I understand that HR's come in small quantities, so it's possible that with such small samples that predicting future can be difficult. But it appears that Jackson is unusually HR-vulnerable, and Cashner is unusually HR-resistence. I don't claim to know why. Perhaps it's that Cashner's fastball is not only typically faster but it has more tail to it, so that minor leaguers just can't drive his fastball. Perhaps Jackson's is straighter, or less consistently fast. Very possibly it's a reflection of Jackson's personality, so that he sometimes loses focus and lays in some mashable strikes. More likely it's that that Cashner lives heavily on the fastball, whereas jackson throws a lot more breaking balls. That's great for strikeouts (some of the good ones are unhittable), But if he's throwing 15 more breaking balls per start than Cashner, that's 15 more opportunities to hang one and get it drilled. Scouts talk up the good breaking balls, but the same guy who throws 20 really beautiful deadly breaking pitches in a game can still throw 5 hangers, one or two of which get drilled. From this view, it's well possible that next year, when Carpenter starts the year healthy and is another year older and more accustomed to handling a workload, that they'll push him to throw more breaking balls; if so, perhaps his HR-rate will rise, too. Perhaps it's because jackson is more aggressive and willing to challenge hitters with strikes, and would rather challenge a guy with a fastball down the middle than walk him. That could jive with why his pitch-count-per-inning is better than Cashner's, and his walk-rate lower. But whatever the underlying cause, in general a guy's tendency to allow HR's is somewhat characteristic, and Cashner looks like he's plus-plus in that aspect, whereas jackson looks like he's no better than average and possibly something of a minus in that regard. When I ranked Cashner higher, that was part of my reasoning. (The better fastball, not only velocity-wise but action-wise also factored in, as did personality/character/commitment/coachability factors.) I don't disagree with any of that. In my season end write up, I would've gotten into that. I just posted a quick thing on Miles' blog and tried to add some comments onto that. I think Cashner generates better late movement on his fastball, although all the reasons you've stated are fair when discussing the HR differences between the two. I anticipate that, over an extended period, Jackson may run into some problems in AAA due to HR's (though the control will make or break him). I can certainly buy Cashner higher, and I've also acknowledged that I like Jackson and have my biases there. In fact, I anticipate Cashner to rank higher on most season end lists.

You're trying really hard to talk yourself into that one, and in the end you still have nothing positive to say about the player. ;) huh considering the rates at which players make the bigs, saying that I think a guy can make the bigs ... well, I thought that was very positive, particularly considering how much discussion Colvin has engendered. I was a fan of the pick then, and he'll likely make the bigs. Again ... how's that ... not positive?

http://www.npbtracker.com/2009/09/mlb-scouts-watch-chen/ Don't think it's been posted yet, but supposedly, we're watching a Taiwanese southpaw pitching in Japan. Here's hoping our recent success helps, although considering the kid's older, it'll probably be a different dynamic.

I posted a quickie top 20 over on Miles blog - still tweaking it - 1. Starlin Castro, B+/B. I'm not to keen on making this move up, but at the end of the day, we're talking about a potential All-Star shortstop who people expect will develop some power as he matures. Add in that most expect his defense to be good, along with his performance this year after being pushed hard, and I just gave him the edge in the end. The other option was Vitters, but if we're talking about both guys in terms of potential, I'll take my potential AS shortstop over my potential AS third baseman, particularly when one is a level higher. So, why am I not too keen on making this move? It's not that I don't buy Castro - I buy him plenty. It's that there's a lot of physical maturation left, and we've got to see how he adjusts. That said, it sure feels like the Cubs expect a lot out of him ... and soon. I wouldn't be surprised if he's being loosely penciled in as the starting shortstop in 2011 ... perhaps the first year post-Lou. I think there's an outside shot of being a top 30 prospect on some lists, and I feel comfortable that he will be in the top 60. 2. Josh Vitters, B+/B. I like him. I can defend him. I find it ridiculous how people ride the highs and lows of a minor league season so much (I am also certainly guilty of that). Vitters had a hot streak in Peoria earlier this year, and you had some folks (I saw some posts over at Sickels) asking if he was a top 20 prospect. Then, he had a slump before the promotion. He struggled after getting promoted, but injuries were a factor, and yet, a lot of people seem to want to dump on him right now. Look, he wasn't as good as his hot streak, and maybe he isn't an off the charts prospect that excels right away when he moves up. But he's still a dang good prospect. Do I have my concerns? Without a doubt. I've never been a gung ho Josh Vitters was going to be great. But he improved this year and there isn't enough for me to think that he's backslid that much since going to A+. He has to make improvements at the plate, though. 3. Jay Jackson, B. I expect the Cubs starting pitchers to be underrated in general. I'd comfortably put Jay Jackson in a top 100 list, but it wouldn't surprise me if he slides out of it. He had a strong stretch in AA before falling off and then getting demoted. The demotion was a shame from a fan's perspective, as we weren't able to know how big the control issues were, as his stuff is too good for A+. He dominated A+, and had a decent outing in Iowa. Considering how fast he's moved, it's been a great pick. His velocity has been reportedly better this year (I know a couple outings, he was able to reach back and hit upper 90's when need be ... even if you think the radar guns are off, certainly possible, that still means he was able to reach back and hit mid-90's). The slider's still there, the change and curve, by most accounts, improved this year. I fully acknowledge that I am a fan, so maybe I have my biases. 4. Andrew Cashner, B. I think he's getting a bit of a bad rap, but then again, he has to step it up next year. The peripherals aren't all that great, but then again, he was on a pitch count, and IIRC, he was also limited in what pitches to use at times. With a plus-plus fastball, a potentially plus but inconsistent slider, and a developing change, he's advanced far better than I ever thought he could as a starter. I can certainly buy Cashner over Jackson, as Cashner has the most potential of any arm in our system. I can see Cashner as a starter now, but I can also see him perhaps having a Papelbon like run, being called up for the pen and being too good to move out. Would rather see him stick as a starter, though. I anticipate he'll get on the top 100 list for some, and perhaps fall ahead of Jackson for many. 5. Chris Carpenter, B. I was very wary of reading too much into his numbers in Peoria, but he's had a nice run up the ladder and proven that this was a break out season. He's always had the plus stuff, and in that respect, I'm simply happy that he stayed healthy this year. Am I completely sold that he's a starter? Not there yet, but it's been promising. He's sort of flown under the radar a bit for a lot of folks, it seems (non Cubs fans that is). I think he's got a shot at top 100, although top 120 seems more likely. 6. Brett Jackson, B/B-. I'm very pleased with the start, but then again, as I've said all along, I would've been troubled if he's struggled. Anyhow, the Brett Jackson's discussion have been done on the board, so I'll leave it alone. I'm excited, and looking forward to see if he can break out in 2010. I think there's a shot at top 100, although top 150 seems more possible, and perhaps top 120. 7. Hak-ju Lee, B/B-. Very good start. Some of the numbers have me a bit concerned, but he's the type of guy that can create some opportunities for himself. I wouldn't be surprised if he cracked top 100, particularly on BA. 8. Dae-Eun Rhee, B-/C+. He’s back. On ability alone, arguably top 5 in our system. As I've noted, I was going to give him the draft pick nod ranking provided that he was able to throw this year. I mean, we have some background, excellent potential to look forward to. 9. Welington Castillo, C+. I'm riding this one, even if I'm alone (and I was bashing him earlier this year a bit). For the most part, it seems like his defense has improved. He had some poor luck with the bat early, but he's had a stellar 2nd half hitting. I still believe he's the most talented catching talent in the entire organization, including bigs, but he has to put it together. Some have compared him to Yadier Molina - I wonder if Bengie might be a better comparison. Does he get a positional bonus? Probably. Still debating sliding him down 1. 10. Kyler Burke, C+/B-. Putting it together, or benefit of experience dealing with younger arms? He's had a dominant season, and one could make the case that he goes higher, and I'm very excited. I also buy that he's improved, but how much? I was slow to the wagon on this one, due to his early summer struggles, but he deserves a high ranking, with the performance and tools. 11. Tyler Colvin, C+. I've taken my fair share of shots at Colvin, more out of frustration than anything. So, I wanted to be positive. I was always fine with the pick, and it seems quite likely that he'll see some time in the bigs. It's not a bad pick folks, and for those that still lament the pick, it's time to move on. Just wish he could be a bit more consistent. 12. Ryan Flaherty, C+. Took me awhile to come around on this one as well. The peripherals were always fine, and if he was able to put together a strong season while fixing his swing and being more sound defenisvely? Sweet. ARL will be oft-mentioned this winter on him, I imagine, but I think that's overhyped in that, if Daytona had been in it, I think both Flaherty and Burke would've moved up the ladder. 13. Jeffry Antigua, C+. Maybe a bit of a stretch, but the young lefty has had an excellent season, and it wouldn't surprise me if the Cubs got aggressive with him. 14. Ryan Searle, C+. Good sink, particularly for the size, and he's likely to get better. 15. DJ LeMahieu, C+/C. Basically, seems like another Ryan Flaherty type, except the power has to develop. 16. Casey Coleman, C+/C. Love the gamer in him. Love the pedigree. Love the character. Just wish he had better stuff. 17. Chris Archer, C+. I am very pleased, but also taking a wait and see. He's had a solid fast/plus curve combination since HS, and that type of combination should be able to dominate Low A. There's some control issues, perhaps some mechanical work, and overall arsenal development seems needed. That said, seems like his fall back is as a solid pen arm. 18. Logan Watkins, C/C+. Former prep QB has shown an advanced approach. I anticipate that he'll be worked with Hak-ju Lee as much as possible. 19. Chris Huseby, C/C+. After last year, simply pitching was a plus. Protecting him was the right call. Will he be tried as a starter again? Here's hoping. 20. John Gaub, C/C+. I love what he is, but I've got a tough time pushing him higher due to, well, what he is. Still working on grades and working on 11-30.