toonsterwu

I voted Candelario initially, but I've made that point elsewhere. I'm switching my vote temporarily to Cease because it looks like a two man race and I much prefer Cease ahead of Eloy. Why? 1. Eloy looks great, and when he's on, it looks wonderful, but there's a lot of work to do to tap into that ceiling, with several reports focusing on his swing, IIRC. The hit tool also isn't projected that well right now, although considering his age and approach, it very well could develop. 2. Cease has explosive stuff, and that tends to play up. He's healthy now, and the mechanics have been revamped. Yes, pitchers are riskier, but both guys carry big enough risk factors that, while Eloy's potential ceiling is superb, I'm much more comfortable with the idea of Cease's ceiling holding more value for the organization at this point in time, and within the next year. The combination of player ceiling and player value gives him the edge over Eloy, IMO. Of course, Cease still has some work to do to edge ahead.

lmao people are so pissed because the Cubs are awesome. Also, I know typical Chicago sports radio drivel, but I heard multiple people on the score speculate that the Cubs might end up being accused of tampering and losing draft picks. I'm pretty sure that until a FA has signed on the dotted line, clubs are able to freely speak with and negotiate with a FA. Idiots. I managed to hear about 10 min of Chris Rongey last night, scratching his head about why Fowler would only want a 1 year deal...and how dumb it was, etc... A bunch of texters/emailers must've explained how week next years crop of outfielders is, but he dismissed that as a huge risk because of possibly being injured or bad this year. There's some risk for Fowler, but I think the argument why it makes sense is because Fowler's strongest attribute that he was selling was really his discipline/approach. Of course, health is a factor, but assuming he's healthy ... and gets enough AB's ... he should still show enough to get a decent 2-3 year deal next year. I doubt he'll ever land that big, long term, 4-5 year deal, as teams don't seem likely to give that out to guys his level, but maybe Close can get it.

I tend to think Close went overboard on his comments there when Duquette already acknowledged he never thought a deal was close. My own hunch, based on the news reported, is that Duquette knew all along about their desire for an opt out, but both parties worked on the parameters of a deal as there weren't many other options, so might as well look at things. Hence why Fowler told Adam Jones he was coming down to Florida a few days ago. Nothing was finalized, but somehow, maybe secondary Orioles officials leaked that things were getting close, hence why the news reports went crazy about a deal. Close probably had an agreement with the Cubs to give them a call before a deal, or something along the lines, and the Cubs came in with an offer, and he's back. Either way, hard to see any real wrong-doing here by any parties. Everyone was simply doing business, and somehow leaks happened, which happens a lot. Now, if Duquette leaked it, or someone close to him, perhaps that's a different story, but the word out of the DC area doesn't suggest that. ____ As for the Orioles - I don't really blame them at all for wanting to drive a hard-line. Hell, I've been of the opinion they should've just avoided Gallardo and Fowler and kept the picks. To be quite honest, if Kim's discipline translates from Korea, they might be fine. Margin of error is simply less now, unless they can surprise with another move (still believe they should try and shop Britton for help now and prospects, which I think they could get ... would still have a good pen). That said, Duquette's said a deal wasn't close, and I can understand wanting more than 1 guaranteed year for giving up the pick.

I tend to think that the "Cubs jumped in late" is probably similar to the Zobrist situation - basically, give us a call before you sign. Either way ... unless there's clear-cut evidence of "tampering" (hard to see how that word is being thrown around, as Fowler didn't have a signed contract), it's hard to see any sort of punishment happen. Much as the 2nd round pick staying sounded nice, this is even better, and in combination with the Coghlan move is just stunning. I didn't even think this was possible. I thought some team would offer a solid contract to Fowler for 2-3 years, and he'd take it, but I guess, thinking about Close, I should've realized they wanted an opt out. The additional depth in the rotation with Aaron Brooks is just icing on top. And the crazy part is ... the Cubs haven't REALLY pushed all in. We've kept most of the system chips so that, if something happens midseason, we can really push all-in and still try to add a needed piece or two. Just crazy how smooth this offseason has gone.

The combination of moves was great, but I would've been ... okay ... with the return if this was a standalone move because it would've provided additional depth to the rotation, and I wonder if Brooks might be better off being utilized like Shawn Tolleson. Of course, in concert with the Fowler move ... great.

I'm fine with Cease (that upside does seem to be that good, and if the improved mechanics hold ... he could really explode in prospect rankings), but I'm going to with Candelario. 1. Defensive improvement/value - By most accounts, Candelario should, at the very least, be able to be at 3rd through his cost-controlled years, and perhaps into his prime. 3rd base is still a relatively weak position overall throughout baseball. 2. Slowly tapping into offensive tools - There's quality bat speed and enough loft that he has above average power potential. While I'm not sure he maintains his K/BB ratios from AA last year, he has shown throughout his career that he's not a haphazard hacker. Is there some tidying up? Sure. That said, the combination of his bat speed and a relatively disciplined approach leads me to think that he should be able to hit for enough average. I don't suspect he'll ever be a plus hit tool guy, although he might have the tools to do it. Do I wish he had more than a half season of plus offensive performance in AA? Of course. That said, let's keep in mind that, outside of that A+ stint a couple years back ... he's always been decent-solid offensively, and at an age that's awfully young. I hate age arguments holding any level of significance, and my main point is still more on tools and performance, but he's in his age 22 year next season ... and is on the 40 man and could be in AAA. 3. Concerns over his lack of body of work - It's valid. I'm not denying that, but ... he also went to AFL and was, according to one publication, the breakout prospect there (or words to that effect). ____ Despite making the argument for Candelario, I don't really love giving him the nod here. I tend to think Candelario's ceiling is higher than McKinney's. McKinney's floor is higher, but Candelario having success in AA last year should limit some concerns about his ability to perform up the ladder (now, can he maintain a high level of performance is another question). I think the body of work, raw tools, positive developmental trend, and age are enough here to lead me to give Candelario the nod. My 2nd choice is Cease on upside, so if I forget about this thread and we are nearing a runoff, feel free to flop my vote to Cease if it helps (although with the way McKinney has taken a lead, I doubt it'll matter).

I really could go either way on this. My instinct is that Happ's bat is probably going to play big next year (although not necessarily erasing any worries about how he'll do in the bigs, as I suspect the K rate will still be high). Almora, though, doesn't need the bat to play off the charts to be of value, and I think Almora gets the slight edge here for me.

you post on more than one orioles site? in the past I have, although thinking about it now, I only posted on one on the topic. Hey, I've been in the DC Metro area for a huge chunk of my life, and have gone to OPACY a fair amount, along with the local minors, which are mostly Orioles.

He'd be what, now, close to 40? ____ As for Gallardo, I've posted on Orioles sites that I think this is a dumb move. They are in a tough division with Boston gunning to jump back in, the Yankees looking good short and long term, and the Blue Jays likely still on top, with the Rays having a nice young group to work with. They should've kept their picks, tried to accumulate more picks (let Darren O'Day and Chris Davis go), rebuilt, and cleared their sheets for the 2018 FA class. The 2016 draft looks deep, so with a ton of picks and money to spend, the Orioles really could've rebuilt the farm system in a 1 year or 2, cleared money up for a run at an impact FA or two, and sold Machado on a bright future. That said ... I sort of get the rationale for their offseason. Again, don't agree with it, just I see the reasoning they may be thinking. Rebuilding is going to take a lot of time, with how thin their system is now. Their core is nearing the end of their run (Adam Jones and Chris Davis are near the end of his prime, Wieters is past and will be gone), and the guys to form their next core ... aren't really in place (there's Machado, maybe Schoop). There seems to be a thinking that if they struggle now, Machado may be more inclined to leave, so that might've played a factor in things. They know they've out-paced their projections (and I think part of that can be attributed to Showalter's ability to manage his pen and make sure guys are rested). With Gallardo and Fowler, they can probably be a .500ish team, so a little luck and maybe a midseason move, and they could be in the thick of things.

Disappointing final loss for UVA. Bright spot is that the rotation looks like it may be alright with Tommy Doyle's stuff looking real sharp. The offense also looks like it could really dominate, and they should be solid defensively. That said, 2 bad games from the pen. If the guys there don't step it up, hard to see who's coming to the rescue. It's possible late in the year, someone like Derek Casey may be available, but they really need Alec Bettinger to step it up.

I'm going to be mildly curious what the Angels gave up. Considering how bad their farm system is, to potentially get a regular and avoid that platoon ... it's hard to see a cost they gave up that could be considered too much, but it's not impossible. At worst, they gave up some lottery ticket assets for a lottery ticket hope at a regular in the bigs. All in all, considering how thin their system is, and their financial limitations (I think), this could be a pretty good deal for them.

I think Candelario's placement probably depends on this spring. He's on such a high now that I could see Iowa, but I'm guessing Tennessee, akin to McKinney starting in High A last year.

Well, it's started. I can't say I'm going to follow many teams early besides ... well, UVA. Connor Jones, by all accounts, was filthy today against Kent State. One game doesn't mean much, but it's a great start for him as he builds a case to be a high first round pick. A lot of talk about what UVA's OF was going to look like. Aaron Fitt was gushing about UVA's freshman OF's on twitter. Can't say Cameron Simmons was anywhere near the top of my mind in terms of impact freshman for UVA, but then again, several years back, Brandon Waddell was 2nd fiddle entering his freshman year (if that). There was also some question on who would get third base, and freshman Andy Weber got the first look, despite a lot of pre-season focus on Ryan Karstetter, who was one of the big name freshman signings. Karstetter did come in at DH eventually. My hunch is that, over the long haul (namely, 2017), Karstetter may end up moving to first, with Pavin Smith sliding to the OF, but that's for another year. ___ Only other thing I noticed was Sharawyn losing to Alabama. One game doesn't mean much, but I'm very curious how Shawaryn looks this year. That said, looks like that was just a tough luck loss for him.

If he starts in the PCL, I'd be surprised if Candelario didn't show some power. Guys with decent hit tools, solid approaches (again, doubt he repeats last year's flick the switch K/BB numbers at AA, but for his career, he's shown a fairly solid approach at the plate), and above average power potential tend to show some power in the PCL if they make enough contact. Obviously, nothing is impossible. Now ... I can actually see him struggling/bad a bit more (say, putting numbers akin to his first High A stint ... or even his numbers in A ball), with the case being that upper level plus stuff guys and upper level, polished junk stuff guys causes him trouble, but even then, I would expect him to show some power ... if he's in the PCL. That said, he is going to be an interesting guy to watch. If Candelario gets off to a hot start ... he could definitely vault his way up into being a big time trade chip at the deadline, a young, close to ready 3rd base prospect.

Don't know about top 25, but I can definitely see Cease making a jump to top 50 if the revamped mechanics hold and the stuff still shows well. There's some similarities to Anderson Espinoza in terms of stuff, but the biggest difference, by most accounts, was mechanics. If Cease's revamped mechanics hold ... I can definitely see him make that jump.

I have a tough time going with McKinney or Zagunis here, as there's enough upside to look around at to go with two high floor guys, solid, but not superb, ceilings. Still, to each their own, and I do think both McKinney/Zagunis will see the bigs in their careers. Underwood's a tough call. On the one hand, love his potential. On the other hand, performance. I buy that he was working on his changeup, but still, in A+, with his raw stuff, he really should be able to show better than he did. Too high for EJM for me. With some mixed reports, just feel like we gotta know more to go this high. I've long been against ranking relievers too high unless they are just surefire lockdown late inning arms. Love CJ Edwards, not sure I'm going that far to call him surefire. High standard? Yes. A bit unfair? Perhaps the standard's a bit high, but that's the way I go with it. Love de la Cruz, but really ... I can't make the case that he's definitely a notch or two above Underwood, so no on him this high. Going through the names, I'm left thinking the superb upside of two far away guys (Eloy and Dylan Cease), Ian Happ, and two upper level guys in Candelario and Almora. Jimenez is exciting, but swing wise, looks like he has some more work to do. A part of me wonders how Candelario would be viewed if he hadn't struggled in his first go-around at High A. I'm not sure if the way he flipped the switch on his discipline in AA is maintainable at that level, but I think he's a good hitter who should stick at 3rd, is young, and is in AA. I think he'll hit for a solid average with his bat speed, and I think he'll develop a tick above average power. That's a very talented guy. But is that guy better than Almora right now, value wise? I'm not sure Almora's red hot August is exactly a true representation, but I do buy that he's improved, and I do buy that his defense is still going to be good to great through his cost-controlled years and perhaps to his prime. Will he hit enough? Probably. Will he hit enough and with some pop? A bit more debatable. I keep thinking that there's shades of Brett Jackson's flaws with Ian Happ, namely the swings and misses (although by most accounts, it's not the exactly same issue, as IIRC, Jackson had trouble getting too some pitches). Add in uncertainty on his defensive position, and there's enough things to poke holes at. Still ... while he might not have a plus hit tool, he makes good contact, has power. If you squint hard, you can see some glimmers of a poor man's George Springer here. Cease seems to have improved his mechanics, still has two potential plus pitches, and has time. Yeah, I get the concerns about long range health, but we're really thinking his cost-controlled years, at best, into his prime years. Is there a chance he gets Edwards push to the pen? Perhaps, but you sort of bet against that as of now. I've gone back and forth on this on my own list for awhile, and I'm apt to change my mind again. I've sort of talked myself into Candelario in the last few weeks, and I'm sticking with that for this vote, fully expecting him to not be voted on. No, he doesn't have the power ceiling of Ian Happ, but he's a bit more polished, has shown that he's got a good approach at the plate, has improved defensively, and the bat speed is there. Now, I know there's been some mixed reports on the bat speed, but there's been enough positive reports. He's improved enough at 3rd to think that, unless a team has a better option, a team could probably live with him there through his cost-controlled years and maybe into his prime, although one would suspect that they would be looking for a better option. He's still so awfully young, and still tapping into his offensive potential. I swore I wouldn't talk myself into Candelario all winter, but I kept asking myself ... what's the extreme negative to not push him up here? He's had one offensive hiccup year that seemed to get him "lost" in the system, but really, he's a good offensive talent coming into his own and he's developed defensively. I keep thinking that holds for Almora as well, and much as I tried to talk myself out of it, Almora worked his way up for me as well. I'm just a bit more comfortable with Candelario's offensive profile right now ... but I get an Almora pick. I really wanted to go with Cease - big time stuff, improved mechanics, but really gotta seem him do more to really go on that train.

I thought I read that he had options left, but I could be off. I'd like to add him as depth, but wouldn't surprise me if they managed to get him through waivers. This feels like a calculated gamble on their part, with rosters filled, to sneak a guy through. Otherwise, it's hard to imagine why they would move on from Nolin so soon. He was never as good as some of the hype he got in the Blue Jays system, but he's a usable depth arm who might profile better in the pen than your run of the mill, end of the rotation guy. To be fair, I don't think he's substantially better than say, your Eric Jokisch's of the world, but adding young lefty depth is never a bad thing. If the Cubs tossed something reasonable to them, I'd be fine with it. If they decided against it, okay.

Interesting list. If they have Torres with 60's in so many places, I'm a bit befuddled why he is so low. Overall, I think it's a fairly solid list. I think the Cubs are probably reasonably placed. You could go higher by about 15 slots or so for Torres, but looking at the names they've grouped him with, his spot is reasonable.

I thought this was a quietly fascinating trade. Davis isn't great, but he hits for power, is cost-controlled. Sort of reminds me of a slightly better version of Rob Deer. There's value there, particularly for small market teams searching for power. Nottingham could end up being better, but he's further away, and he's not guaranteed to stick at catcher. Hell, he could turn out to be Khris Davis in a few years. Derby's a lottery ticket far away. A bit surprised they designated Nolin. Feels like Forst and Co. searching for value that they thought was reasonable, even if they are rebuilding a bit. Feels like Stearns thought he was selling high on a guy and getting a prospect he knows. Bolsters the Brewers already solid system, and potentially gives them a long term replacement for Lucroy. As for Braun, at his age, with his history, and with that contract (5 years and a team option for the 6th), I don't see many teams even considering it unless the Brewers swallowed almost all of it or they took a bad contract back. There simply aren't that many teams that seem likely to go down that route. About the only thing I could even remotely see is some sort of Hanley Ramirez/Ryan Braun swap, but I doubt the Brewers would want that. I guess, if a team is close and really desperate for an offensive addition, it's possible they could consider it a bit more, but it would seem to need to be another year or two further down. Just so much money for an aging guy.

Interesting. The BA order is up online now: 1. Dodgers 2. Astros 3. Braves 4. Red Sox 5. Nationals 6. Rockies 7. Rangers 8. Phillies 9. Brewers 10. Twins 11. Pirates 12. Reds 13. Rays 14. Cardinals 15. Mets 16. Indians 17. Yankees 18. Athletics 19. Giants 20. Cubs 21. Royals 22. Diamondbacks 23. White Sox 24. Blue Jays 25. Padres 26. Tigers 27. Orioles 28. Mariners 29. Marlins 30. Angels Interesting list. A bit higher on the Red Sox and Astros than I had it. I get it, as they seem to have weigh the top prospects heavily there (Astros with Tucker/Cameron/Martes/Bregman/Reed and Red Sox with Moncada/Devers/Espinoza/Kopech/Benintendi). A lot lower on the Indians, which I'm a little befuddled by. I guess the ceiling of the Indians guys aren't through the roof, Bradley Zimmer did struggle in AA and has some swing and miss concerns. A bit higher on the Mets ... Matz/Nimmo/Molina/Rosario is a nice foursome at the top, but Nimmo''s still trying to tap into his power, and Rosario's a slick-fielding shortstop with the tools to be a potential plus defender there but is still a lot more projection on offense. Much lower on the Padres/Blue Jays than I expected. I like the Padres, but I get that after the top 3, it's a lot of unrefined talent. Looking at the Blue Jays right now, I probably way over-rated that group when I went through it the other day.

You're using words like "fringe" and "likely to stick through his cost-controlled years". You have "very little" doubt, and you "think" he's "likely" to stick. The scouts like Law who rank Torres really high aren't putting in all those cautionary/escape/guarded phrasing. They like him; they are convinced he will play good, asset SS defense. No cautionary caveats. Lindor, maybe not. But I think he's expected to be very much of the Addison Russell type. None of Russell's individual defensive tools graded great, but he graded very well this summer. The "efficiency" you talk about, I think that's the key. That's why Russell is so good, and I think the Torres guys see that in him as well. The "clock" factor, too. You guys are probably too young to remember, but I think Torres like Russell is expected to be more like Rey Sanchez than Shawon Dunston. May be an issue of semantics here. There aren't that many shortstop prospects that definitively project as plus defenders, let alone elite defensive shortstops, and also project as guys that can stick through the position past their cost-controlled years and through their primes. Doesn't mean that there aren't guys who do - it's just the sheer projection of a guy through their prime years at shortstop is inherently a difficult thing to do. A comparative point would be loose body-point analysis as it pertains to the NFL - I recall a guy, I guess it's been close to a decade now, a 6'6" 275-280 pound defensive end who everyone swore would be able to pack on 15-20 pounds and play as a stout 2-gap 5-technique. Could never hold that weight. There was an OT about a decade ago who was around 6'5" 290 with good reach, and everyone believed he'd be able to hold an extra 10 pounds consistently. Had a solid career, but was always around that 290 range. Short of it is, there's strong enough difficulty in any form of projection on kids. Perhaps I'm being quite cautious in saying that I didn't think he would be an elite defensive shortstop, but thought he'd be fine for short - for me, I thought that was actually fairly positive. Anyhow, my initial point was simply that, I think Torres is going to have to show some power development to be ranked a top 5 prospect. We'll see. ____ There were some folks that really, really loved Kevin Newman out of college last year. Good bat, not much power. Defense at shortstop was a lot more questionable, but a fair amount felt he would be at least average at short, and potentially, above average. Always felt the positive bets on Newman were bets on his hit tool alone being able to carry him far, and I've always been wary of that type of guy, but if you liked him last year, I guess, in a down year, I can sort of get liking him still.

Thanks. I guess Law does feel differently. Plus hands and plus arm, even with, what, 55 range, would get you a fringe plus defender, so okay. Just haven't seen many people say Torres has a plus arm. What little I saw of Torres last year, kid is really smooth out there. Very good action, can't think of the word I want to say on his feet, but ... uh he's very efficient? with his footwork. I have very little doubt about him at short - I think he's likely to stick through his cost-controlled years, and then how he physically matures becomes the factor, but that's true for most guys. Although I still think to jump into top 5 overall, he'd probably need to show power development. Again, I hope Law is right. I hope my thought of Torres pushing Russell to 2nd comes through (although I doubt it now, that was more predicated on the idea that Castro would stick at short for a couple years, settling in Russell at 2nd, and since Russell's at short now, the established guy usually gets prerogative unless there's a substantial issue).

Toonster, you're kind of so-so on Torres's defense. I think some scouts like his defense a lot more than you do. Law is one of them. I haven't seen many people placing him into say, Lindor category. I can't say I read Law all that much, so maybe he does view it differently (although I don't recall Law thinking of Torres as elite defensively). I mean, Torres, who I am really high on (I think I even made the comment last year that it wouldn't surprise me if he's our shortstop in a couple years, pushing Addison off) largely projects as above average defensively, solid range (maybe a tick improved), good arms and feet), which is very nice, but my previous point was basically that, to be top 5 overall without elite defensive potential, his power is going to really have to take a step forward (doesn't mean I expect Torres power projection to jump, just that it likely needs to start developing) unless for some reason it's a really, really down year in the farm.

You've got to really buy power development to even get him in the top 5, even if it ends up being a down year. I mean, he doesn't have elite defensive shortstop potential, so everything else has to be developing. Can I see it? Sure, but I'm just not sure I see that happening in one season, but here's hoping Law's right. I mean, a guy like Barreto projects fairly similarly to Torres and is a bit more polished. That said, everyone has their biases and preferences.

No, that's not how it works. The team signing the player loses the pick and it's essentially skipped in draft order. The team who loses the player gets a comp round pick. yeah, that didn't make sense. i might've misread the report. ANyhow, having the 2nd rounder (slipped my mind we signed two, so we'd lose the compensatory pick gained) would be a nice cherry on top.