toonsterwu

I'll start with that rankings are meant only for discussion. From a year to year basis, the only things I care about are a) Is the system improving? b) Does the system fit the organization (or, has it helped the organization ... after all, if you are the top system in the game, the chances of you staying there are, well, very slim)? To answer that, I think there are three truths to the Cubs system as things stand right now: i) It's not good. I love following the system, but no one's going to mistake this for a top third system in the minors. ii) Our top shelf is better than most people think. The top 5 (the guys O_O listed) is a competitive top 5 with most systems (no, we don't have the elite shelf guys yet, but give it time). iii) Our system is starting to diversify while adding upside. Actually, that's the thing that excites me the most. We're starting to see a bit more of a diverse farm system, and we're seeing more potential than before. So the answer for me to the top two points would be yes. The system's in a win-now mode, so we need the high upside in the lower levels. Sure, we've been hit or miss developmentally in the past, but we've got to keep trying. But rankings are fun, and I'll say that I think I will be flabbergasted if we are in the 26-30 range. 21-25 is likely, and I wouldn't rule out us out as a borderline top 15. Really borderline, but there's an outside chance. The arms are as good as we've been since 2003 (and a case could be made that this is better than 2003 in some respects, at least, what I recall from 2003, as it seems like several of our top arms are in AA (or were in AA in Jay Jackson's case) (granted, there was a ridiculous amount of high upside lower level arms back in 2003, but a lot of them didn't pan out ... remember Justin Jones? Last I checked, he was hanging around in AA somewhere. And for old time's sake ... I'm trying to remember who the pitcher was that we drafted that beaned a guy in college without googling. Ben something?). I think people often times assume that there is a big difference between, say, the 15th rated club and the 25th rated club. There really isn't. It's usually a couple player difference, maybe a good draft difference. Our biggest issue in value right now is the lack of upper level quality chips, but four of our top five (well, five of our top 6, as Carpenter is probably the 6th guy right now) is in High A/AA. Actually, during our "dark years" from around 2004-2006 (we had a horrible ranking last year, but there were signs of life in the low levels), we ranked in the teens at least once, but we had a "cup of tea" system, a system with a bunch of average guys, few top guys, and minimal upside to be really excited about. I think our biggest problem when matching up with other clubs systems comes in that 2nd tier, where we simply have some holes. Some of the guys that go there certainly have questions (Guyer/Castillo had some bad luck in AA this year, but you still have to perform). Others have injuries to work their way back from (like Rhee). I'm coming around to Searle, who I know O_O and Raisin have been high on most of the year. One of my favorites, McDaniel, really went hard in the tank. That said, there's a nice collection of mid-end of the rotation arms to support that 2nd tier (like Casey Coleman, here's hoping he spends the offseason working on that cutter/slider), and next year, here's hoping some guys step up (Flaherty/Lake come to mind, amongst others). I think we're in good shape. The ranking may not be great, but the future outlook is brighter than it's been for awhile. __________________ A quick extra thought: Two guys that I was really intrigued with entering the year, Justin Bristow and James Leverton, seems to have found a groove of late. I really like the arm profile that Wilken seems to go after, and the athletic background of these two offers me some hope that there may be a bit more that can get pulled out. Leverton holds extra intrigue because we really don't have enough lefty starter types. Heck, Chris Rusin could make a case as our 2nd best potential lefty starter, (I doubt Russell goes back to starting), and he just joined our system (that said, Beliveau and Antigua would be in the mix, but geesh, we are lacking in that regards). Here's hoping Aaron Kirk can really reach Boise by year's end.

I'm flabbergasted by the Jackson demotion. I really am ... unless it's off-field stuff, but the reports on that didn't suggest anything to be concerned with. I mean, yes, it was one horrible month, but still ... it's one month, and he's righted the ship before. I keep waiting for a report of an injury, or a workload issue (was a bit concerned that the innings would catch up), but the former hasn't been mentioned, and the latter can't be an issue as he started tonight. As O_O and Raisin know, I'm a bit of a Jackson fan. Perhaps too much. That said, this one surprised me, as it seemed like it surprised some of you guys.