toonsterwu

The chances of a 20+ round overslot pick signing were slim anyways. Feels like the pick of Padgett is more a "hey keep us in mind in 3 years" pick. I think I'm intrigued what happens with Twomey. Another lefty "pitchability" guy, but with a good changeup, some downward action on his 2-seamer. If he gets a breaking ball going, could be interesting. I really wonder if the Cubs, after Happ, looked at the board and the amount of slot money, and said, there really isn't much and it's much better to just add some depth and shoot hard for upside in the international market. It's always important to have some system guys in place to help, and sometimes, some of them may surprise. Happ, at the end of the day, is the key, for the obvious (he's the 1st round pick) and for the fact that a lot of the guys that he's somewhat similar to in our system (McKinney/Zagunis come to mind, if Happ moves to LF) may end up being trade bait this summer, and Happ could conceivably fill any system gaps that may emerge. I hope Happ can play 2nd, and I hope he goes to South Bend to play next to Torres, as that would be a fun experiment to see.

I Want to hope on Padgett, but if they felt confident, tthey probably pop him earlier. I Hope we get Cresto signed. Wonder about Twomey.

I have to think Sands is headed to Florida State now. If they felt he would sign, I gotta imagine that they would've popped him already. They might still pop him later and give a run at it, but the later it gets, the more unlikely it feels. He wasn't the prospect that his brother was, but he was still an intriguing prospect. Maybe he just wants to go to college. Nothing wrong with that.

With the way all these intriguing prep guys are dropping, it's fairly clear that signability was a factor. Looking at it with the knowledge that these guys aren't likely to sign ... this draft was ridiculously thin. It'll likely still turn out quality players, but man, it was thin. Every once in awhile, a depth draft is needed. I imagine this draft will probably fill some holes in the system and provide some useful system pieces, and maybe a couple guys that reach the majors.

Chesny Young keeps hitting. He's got some speed, a good approach. Been a bit lucky so far, and the lack of power doesn't help. Old reports said good straight line speed, good lateral movement, good quickness, and good plate coverage. Bat speed looks solid. Going to have to keep proving it, but he at least deserves some attention now. Victor Caratini having a season hitting average of .250 is ... remarkable considering how bad he was to start the year. I still believe there's some pop there, but he's not helping in that department. Still ... catcher with a solid approach at the plate and some offensive ability makes him intriguing. Solid enough start from Ryan Williams. Hey, maybe he can Hendricks his way up. Going to have to keep proving it though. Francescon's been great this year. Tough to work his way up the ladder amongst the mix of righty pen options, but I wouldn't mind seeing him in AAA. While it doesn't mean that much, it is nice to click on the standings and see that Iowa and Tennessee have winning records, Myrtle Beach has a winning record and barring a collapse, should win the first half of their division, and South Bend is close enough to .500 and should get a boost in the 2nd half. Charcer Burks has quietly had a solid first half and looks like an intriguing, young CF talent.

I completely forgot that we drafted Michael Brenly twice.

I think that's pretty unequivocally bad, myself. That said, the 2011 draft is a good example, there's a bunch of guys who were cause for draft day excitement and then again when they were able to be signed. Gretzky, Lockhart, Dunston, Martin, Maples, Shoulders, the Cubs absolutely won the day(s) of the draft. The certainty about what prospects are better than others after the first...5 picks(not rounds, picks) or so, and sometimes not even then(Schwarber) is vastly, vastly overstated. I don't think it's an unfair assessment to say that's bad. I just feel differently. I think it's much harder than fans acknowledge to get guys up to AAA (hence why we see so many re-treads at AAA hanging around) and close to a cup of tea in the bigs. 3 of the 4 from 2010 have gotten big league time. If I dug around, I could probably find multiple draft years where teams haven't gotten anyone to the bigs. By no means am I saying it's a good draft. I guess it comes down to what one views as a win.

Kind of my point. What made that draft so exciting was grabbing the shiniest toys they could, and then throwing as much money as they could to get them. This draft may be full of yawners, but I trust that they did a lot of homework on these guys. And with the exception of #1, I wouldn't be at all surprised if 3-4 years from now, this year's uninspiring picks aren't doing as well or better than the guys that made that draft so exciting. I think there's a tendency, and I've noted this before, to glorify this regime. I like a lot of what they've done (actually, the only move, off the top, that I immediately disliked right away was early ... when they let Flaherty go when there was a need for a utility player in the upper levels ... and then subsequently put Jeff Bianchi on the 40 man temporarily ... of course, later that winter, they lucked into Valbuena and Cardenas, capably replacing Flaherty/LeMahieu). That said, all regimes can have bad drafts, and I've made the argument before that McLeod's run in San Diego wasn't all that inspiring (2011 was better than 2010, but he had a lot of high picks in 2011). I mean, Andrew Friedman and Billy Beane are two noted guys ... and their systems have gone dry at times in recent years for their respective organizations at the time. Epstein's run in Boston had moments where his system was relatively over-hyped (I made that argument several years back as well, when everyone was talking up all the arms they had ... a lot of them never, ever panned out, and same goes for some of those bats). We don't even have to go that far ... the Cubs 2012 draft isn't all that inspiring right now, and 3 years is a fair amount of time to judge things, and 2013 is anchored by Kris Bryant but besides that, we're probably looking at Trevor Clifton as the next most intriguing guy from that draft as of now. Of course, that comes with the benefit of hindsight. I've always argued that all drafts in all major sports need to be judged from two prisms - hindsight is obviously the one that makes the grades, but judging at the time is certainly a fair assessment. Of course, as noted, we always need to remember that simply getting 1 solid major leaguer from a draft is actually fairly solid, and getting 2-3 is actually great. My issue, if I have one with this draft (again ... I'm not disappointed ... I'm just not excited so far ... and for all the talk about 11-40th round guys ... there's no guarantee we sign them ... ) isn't the "vanilla-ness" of this draft - it's that we drafted a lot of similar guys. We drafted 3 guys who look like pen arms (although I would certainly try Craig Brooks in the rotation first), a couple pitchability arms, two under-sized hit tool OF's (albeit on totally different timelines which does make it relatively okay). I prefer a diverse draft in terms of talent and even positions, as there's certainly enough areas in our system that could use filling in. Functionally, at the end of the day, the issue is with the draft system, and the draft system itself is hindering MLB's efforts to make the draft more exciting. I'm not sure what answer is out there (perhaps hard-slotting through the first 3 rounds?, and then soft-slot numbers for the next 7-10 rounds?). _____ As a side note, the 2010 draft looks bad at the top ... but there's a chance four guys from that draft could see decent MLB careers (Szczur, Jokisch, Beeler, and Aaron Kurcz is actually doing okay in the upper levels as a pen arm). No studs from that draft, but honestly ... getting 4 guys up the AAA with a shot at the bigs ... isn't bad. Not great, but not bad. That draft will always look bad because of the top of the draft (although back then, Golden was largely thought of as a good value pick, and same goes for Gibbs). I think 2009 looks worse right now (that said, Brett Jackson hanging on in AAA, LeMahieu is a steady big leaguer now, though, and Justin Bour has probably even surprised the biggest optimists). 2008 was the draft that got me mildly excited back in the day, and in some respects, that draft has faired relatively well (Cashner, Flaherty's a solid big league role guy, Josh Harrison, and Tony Campana and Jeff Beliveau reached the bigs, which is an achievement). 2008 had one of my favorite minor league names - Rebel Ridling.

Isn't it possible they are saving money on some of these 3-10 rounds with "signability" guys (since you'd lose the pool if they go unsigned) and will reach for a couple guys starting in round 11? I'm happy with the first few picks and will reserve any more judgement until after tomorrow (and even then nobody really knows for years how these guys will all play out). Very possible. For all the talk that happens on draft day, reality is, if we get one solid player from this draft, it's a fine enough draft. There's definitely enough talent from what's been picked to get a solid guy or two. I think Raisin's probably right and they'll probably pop one guy after the 10th round and try to see if they can convince him to sign. There's a fair amount of intriguing prep guys that have slipped through so far.

Preston Morrison, "pitchability" right, according to Jim Callis.

A BA report says he has a high effort delivery with a fastball that can touch 95. A separate report online noted he had a curveball and added a cutter this year. Sounds like a relief guy that could be tried as a starter initially, a la Corey Black (actually, they are fairly size wise).

Hard not to like this deal. I imagine there's a wink-nod agreement in place to call him up when he's ready, but it's a minor league deal with half the money in bonuses.

Then again, if there's nobody who really excites them, is it that unrealistic to think that rather than grabbing the next best available at slot, they're stocking up on guys they think they can get for a lot less? Well ... my response would be what are they planning with the extra money, then? If every guy is saving a bit for the Cubs (and we certainly don't know that), then what do they do with the extra money?

I don't think anyone really hates the Kellogg pick. He's a solid college pitchability lefty, and sometimes, those guys can work their way up the ladder and become useful assets. I think it's more ... if anything ... we're hoping for a bit more oomph/upside/excitement. To be very clear, every system needs guys like Ryan Kellogg, and if he works his way up the ladder, as a lefty, he always has the outside shot of going to the pen. Pitchability lefties are far more intriguing than pitchability/control righties (random aside ... we rarely talk about pitchability righties ... it's usually a righty with superb command, average stuff (a la Kyle Hendricks) ... I wonder why pitchability, the odd mash-up of a word, doesn't get thrown around with righties as much, when the intent is the same - a guy with command but average stuff).

I'm very curious how the numbers turn out for Happ and Dewees and certainly, our lack of a big pool makes a big factor with these picks. I'm not disappointed with the draft - I'm just not excited about it. Part of it has to do with the types of guys we're picking. Happ was fine - it's been expected for awhile, so sort of got used to it, though I'm still not enthused. Dewees/Wilson seem awfully similar, but they are probably ideally on two way different timelines (if the Cubs bet right on Dewees, he should be in A ball later this year, with an outside shot at AA at some point next year, considering his age ... Wilson probably goes rookie league, instructs, xst, eugene). Kellogg is meh ... every team drafts a pitchability lefty or two at some point in the top 10 rounds, so we were probably popping one anyways, and the 5th round ended up seeing a lot of pitchability college lefties go off the board. I am intrigued enough with Hudson. I gotta think a guy like Donny Everett is a signability issue now. Thinking about guys that could go in the top 10 rounds, I wonder about a guy like Cole Sands now. They've got to know the family's demands relatively well, and he's "fallen" a bit, so maybe the Cubs are getting their ducks in order on how much money they will need. The Hickman idea as a 6th-10th rounder would be one I would like. Comes down to signability, I guess. As I type this ... Dave Berg. Eh. Well, Raisin gets a UCLA guy in there. Really hope we are simply getting our ducks in order in terms of money and saving up for someone. I've got to think we've saved something so far.

Oy, Kellogg. Well, we were going to pop one or two of those at some point today, so a pitchability lefty is fine, I guess. 5th round sure feels like the college pitchability round with Kellogg, Duchesne, Waddell, and Jacome. Very curious how the numbers work out for the first 2 guys in Happ/Dewees.

We sure like OF's. Like the arm pick.

I really hope that Dewees can play CF up the ladder. The idea of him in LF is very unappetizing. He's not going to RF on a 35 arm, that's for sure.

Yea, that's all I was responding to. Both guys should be on a similar timeline to start, in all likelihood, to start, and if Happ can play 2nd, he'll be far more intriguing, while Dewees skillset likely starts him off in CF. Now, I guess it's not impossible that they could push Happ or Dewees to SB, start the other in Eugene, and have both play CF. I don't know if I love that idea, though. I tend to think Happ should just be given the "go out, have some fun, swing away, and we'll worry more about your defense at instructs" route (sort of feels like this was what they did with Zagunis last year ... ).

a or b ... not c. At some point, we'll be bad again, and same goes for the Astros. Here's hoping that's a long ways into the future, though. Really, though, if MLB wants their draft to get more excitement/intrigue, they should a) Move the draft back far enough that enough top prospects (namely, the college guys) can attend with their families (a part of me thinks the "All-Star Game and Draft" combo is a bad idea though ... I feel like that's too far ... ) b) Allow for trades of picks in the say, top 10 rounds. There would obviously need to be some tweaking, and at some point, teams will have to figure out a way to determine value so that you don't get consistently crazy trades, but that's doable in time, particularly in this analytical era. I don't think the MLB draft will ever get the intrigue of the NFL and NBA simply because of the plethora of HS kids involved and the fact that most people won't know much about them, but those two simple moves would likely increase fan interest by a fair amount.

I gotta think Happ starts at 2nd. You don't draft a 2nd college guy, an older college guy, like Dewees, with his skillset, and plan on playing him in LF to start, and Dewees and Happ should be, at the start, on a relatively similar timeline. It may work out that Happ gets tried at CF, but at the start, I gotta think he's at 2nd, and then maybe 3rd or LF. As for today, I'd be surprised if we didn't take at least 3-5 arms, and probably 1-3 upside prep arms. It's a bit dependent on information we can't be certain of (namely, what some of these prep kids will sign for and how much savings we get on Happ/Dewees), as well as what type of cheap senior signs are available.

I'm sort of rooting for TAMU for some odd reason. Guess is I'm still mystified at how TCU managed to make it to regionals. Either way, I do think the bottom bracket is setting up nicely for Vanderbilt. If their offense comes to play, that'll be Fulmer in Game 1, in all likelihood, and assuming a win (granted, Eshelman will be tough), that means ... uh, the lefty (name is slipping) or Buehler in Game 2 against possibly LSU, and most likely, without Lange. Top bracket is a bit tougher to figure, but feels like Florida has to be the favorite up there.

what if they signed Eddy Martinez too!? um ... I doubt Martinez, if signed, would suddenly jump to America and jump to short-season this year. I'd be rather surprised, if the Cubs signed him, if he came over before fall instructs.

Kevonte Mitchell will be in that outfield too and he's a top 30 prospect in the Cubs system. More I think about it, more I think one of Happ/Dewees, if not both, get pushed to South Bend sooner than later if they show any of the offensive polish the Cubs bet on. Mitchell can handle CF in the low minors, or perhaps they push Happ to play 2nd next to Torres at South Bend. Either way, you want your most intriguing guys getting AB's, and Mitchell/Jimenez are intriguing, and off the top, 2nd base at Eugene should be ... Frandy de la Rosa?

If it requires 4+ to keep Fowler, my guess is they move on from him. Denard Span would make some sense, and I'd be surprised if Span took 4+. Short of it is, I doubt they sign Fowler to 4+.