toonsterwu

Good. Falter, flop. I don't mind if he looks bad and is given back.

That's fair. No news could be bad.

I went Struck, Golden, and Hatley. - Why Struck over Loosen? I'm not necessarily convinced that Loosen's stuff is better than Struck's. I'm not necessarily convinced his command is better either. If I believe in the former two statements, I really can't rank Loosen ahead of Struck considering Struck is performing at a higher level. - Why not Reed? I'm not really convinced he can start. If he gets a chance/proves me wrong, then awesome. But as of now, if he's just a potential future pen guy, I don't see the case of taking him over an upper level pen arm like Hatley, someone with a similar level of stuff on his top two pitches. - Why Golden? I'm not real sure. Seems an acknowledgement to perceived upside, but I liked what I saw two years ago. I really pondered Pin-Chieh Chen here for quite a bit - there's a part of me that wonders if he "breaks out" (a tiny bit) in Daytona. Chen's got a good approach and some speed to work with. That said, Golden's ceiling is that much better right now and both are fairly far away. My other thoughts was Penalver, but offensive questions, as of now, make it tough for me to pull the trigger.

I do like Dunston Jr. enough (granted, I still think this is a touch high overall ... by 3-4 spots), but unless Rosario's injury is serious, he really should be ahead by a good notch or two.

Your right, I forgot about the rule. Still ... do wonder if they pull off a trade for a lefty, either pen or rotation. Maybe not the Orioles (although their bevy of lefties increases the possibility that someone could be moved), just in general. Not the biggest need, though.

There really isn't much on the roster that needs to be projected. I guess (based on the comments I missed several pages of debate on the 25th man. Leaving aside the scintillating debate on the 25th man of a pedestrian team, I think projecting the Cubs record is a bit tough. I think it really comes down to how well they are playing this summer. If they tank early, the chances seem quite high that there could be some selling of parts, which could really flatten the record in the 2nd half. My initial hunch is somewhere from 70-81 wins. I think we under-sell the chance of the rotation being a bit more inconsistent than it looks (Jackson has moments that he looks great ... then he has moments where he looks like a 4th/5th starter - see ... well career, and last year). We've got one year of Samardzija that we're banking on, and in Garza's case, he's coming off injury, and it'd be tough to bet that he could replicate his 2011 (although one hopes so). Pen isn't any certainty, and the lineup could easily stall as it could go up. I'll get back to pondering projections later, but, and someone may have discussed this possibility, but I half wonder if a spring trade could happen. We've got some parts that we could potentially move. There's some obvious candidates, like Soriano/Marmol, but I'm not really thinking "big" here (and those would be "big" trades because of name and the likelihood of us eating money). I'm more thinking if a team might suddenly wonder if, say, Scott Hairston, could fill a role and if we could get something useful for that. Specifically, I wonder, if guys like Wood/Raley/Rusin look bleh, if they might go out and trade for a young lefty (and if we want to go deeper, I'm thinking about the Orioles here and their excess of lefties, along with their need for a DH type bat ... of course, Soriano is a possible "fit" as well, but that's a more complex scenario).

Gonna be an interesting year for my Wahoos. Good start to the season. The offense should be solid. It's led be Derek Fisher, but there's a solid cast of hitters around him. They seem really high on some of the freshmen, like Joe McCarthy. There's the usual cast of athletic players, so defensively we should be fine. The big question entering the year was the pitching. We lost Branden Kline to the draft, and then Artie Lewicki went under the knife (really had some breakout potential in his junior year, reminded me a bit of Rob Morey). Instead of touted freshman Nathan Kirby getting a rotation spot, or veteran hand Kyle Crockett, Brandon Waddell won the opening day job and has gotten a lot of love from the staff. Veteran Scott Silverstein follows, and there were good summer reports on him. They really like Nick Howard in the rotation as well, but he's also the starting 3rd baseman. Whit Mayberry came back earlier than expected from TJ, and may grab a spot. Short of it is, the rotation is likely a work in progress in the early-goings. Electric arms Cam Tekker and Josh Sborz may help in the pen, along with Kyle Crockett. Trey Oest had a very nice start, so will be curious where he fits in as the season progresses. A lot of freshmen arms. In general, expectations aren't high this year. They actually had a surprising year last year, but 2 years of attrition of key guys (including our own Stephen Bruno) was going to lead to a rebuilding year. I don't expect them to host a regional this year, but I do expect them to get into the field. It's a ridiculously young team - only 9 juniors or seniors on the entire squad (34 total). 2014 should be a big year for them - another good pitching prospect coming in, the development of these young freshman arms, and most of the offense coming back. As for draft prospects, not much. Lewici was the one big name, and he'll probably come back another year. I mean, I could see all the seniors perhaps get a flyer look. The most intriguing guys are probably Kyle Crockett and Whit Mayberry. With Mayberry, who pitched well last year before going under the knife, a lot will depend on how strong he is. He had a nice fastball (92/93) and slider combination when he was on. Ceiling probably isn't huge, but he should get a look. Crockett fascinates me. IMO, he should be starting, but he's just so reliable in the pen. I wonder if he'll get a look as a starter in the pros, like another former UVA lefty, Matt Packer. Silverstein has some power as a lefty, so that may be a sleeper to watch in the minors, as a lefty pen arm type.

I kept thinking someone was missing, but didn't think too hard on it. I might've considered him for the 3rd slot here,. Raisin, if we do another one, could you toss Pin-Chieh Chen in there? I keep pondering whether or not he might surprise (not necessarily breakout, as his offensive skillset is still a bit limited to imagine some big-time season) in the FSL, out of the MWL.

First two were easy for me, Nick Struck and Jose Rosario, and I've hammered out reasons why I've been voting them since 29/30, so the short version: Struck - upper level arm with some life on the fastball, and a capable 3 pitch arsenal. Young, with some production record. Ceiling isn't high (5th starter), and there are some command issues, plus physically, he just isn't a big boy. That said, he's got 3 decent-solid pitches. He's ahead of Loosen/Carreno (two guys with fairly similar ceilings), and has more juice on the fastball. I wonder about him in the pen. Rosario - Had he stayed healthy (and continued to perform the way he did), he was a solid top 30 guy, if not top 25. Electric fastball, flashes on the breaking ball. Ceiling as a starter is probably a mid-rotation type, but the betting money is still probably the bullpen for him. But it's an intriguing asset, and we're in the mid-late 30's. Unless the injury is serious, it seems reasonable to get him on soon. ______ I debated the last one quite a bit, and I didn't really like my decision. But for now, I'm going Marcus Hatley. Chances are pretty good that he'll see the bigs in his career, and he does have late inning potential. There are far more fascinating guys, but a guy like Penalver is so far away and has some offensive questions. Austin Reed is a nice looking arm, but let's see how he holds up mechanically and he's far away. Loosen/Carreno dont' have the ceiling, and the upper level lefties aren't necessarily safer than Hatley. Golden was a thought, but a lot of unknowns there. Edit: Whoa, those were totally not the right numbers for Jay Jackson. I must've been looking at something I scratched out earlier in the season. His pen numbers ended up being 46.1 ip, 42 H's, 23 BB's, 24 R's, 6 HR's, 45 K's, not good, not horrible. 13 R's came in 3 outings that lasted a total 3.2 innings. He's just not a starter, but I still wonder about him as a pen arm.

Hatley has a very good slider. When on, his fastball/slider combination can be lethal, so as Raisin notes, there is some late inning potential.

CubsinNC, I get the argument you are making. But I'd counter with, well, if his ceiling isn't high (and you note that he could be a 5th starter, but you'd guess middle relief) then why take a guy so far away versus, say, a Nick Struck, Brooks Raley, or Chris Rusin type, low ceiling guys who are in the upper levels. Anyhow, I voted Rosario/Arias/Struck. As Raisin noted above, Rosario was a solid bet to be top 25/30 before the injury. I really haven't heard anything to suggest that this is something serious. If it is, I'd drop him like a rock, but if not, he should get on in this area, IMO. And without hearing anything too negative, I'll assume that it isn't that serious. Arias' upside is one of the highest in the system (I think you could argue that his SP upside is one of the top 5 in the system). He's also dang raw. But ... the upside is worth the gamble here, IMO. I'll still stick with Struck. 2 solid pitches, 3 pitch arsenal, in the upper levels, with velocity in the low 90's and touching mid-90's. I wonder if he might be better in the pen (if he could ramp up the fastball some more). Improved command would really sharpen things up. By no means does this mean I have any high expectation for Struck - I think he's a 5th starter type if he is given a look in that role in the bigs, and I'm not sold he's a late inning arm in the pen. Still ... compared to the raw arms in the lower levels or the upper level arms without a lot on the fastball, and with his solid enough performance track record, it works for me here.

I guess Rosario's a touch on the older side for A ball, but it was only his age 21 season. Age 21 in Low A is ... okay. A smidge on the high side perhaps, but okay.

You could go any number of ways with our lefties and make a case for it. The above argument that Kirk should be last is understandable, as those weren't intriguing numbers, but I wonder if his stuff might be the best of the group (fastball in that 87-91 range, solid change, decent curve, IIRC), and hence why I wonder if he's the most intriguing of the lot (which doesn't mean that much). I'd probably put Raley as a "solid" 2nd (it's not like the gap between any of them is all that big anyway you view it). I can buy Del Valle as high as 3rd for that fivesome, but I might actually put him last. I'm not all that confident in Del Valle as a starter. In the pen, his stuff might play better than the other guys, though. ____ Raisin, I do think Rhee should be on there. He did get an AFL look, and while the fastball wasn't as sharp or as good as it was a year ago, it still hit 92/93 at times. There's a plus pitch, albeit, not a swing and miss pitch.

Martin should make it on here, and one could argue that this is low for him. I have been hesitant to push hime earlier because he's really going to need to work on his swing, and when combined with how far away he is, it was tough to go higher. But here? A raw, toolsy OF who has good to plus defensive potential and could potentially be a 15-20 HR guy if he can make the adjustments? I could go a number of ways with the arms, but I'm still sticking with Struck as getting a nod. At the end of the day, he's in the upper levels at a young age. The fastball velocity is solid, so I wonder, if he's ever pushed to the pen, if he might be able to bump it up a notch. There's 3 solid pitches. Has to tidy up command a bit, but he looks like he'll get looks in the bigs. There's guys with much better ceilings, but I'll go Struck. The last nod was tough, but ... I just haven't heard anything catastrophic on Jose Rosario's injury, unless I missed something. Without hearing anything catastrophic, I'll give him the nod here. A healthy Rosario (assuming he continued his early performance) probably makes the top 30 without many questions. I really am intrigued with Loosen, and this was before BA's ranking (I believe there's some comments here or on TCR with me talking about Loosen at the start of last year). I like Arias a bunch. I guess, if there's something bad about Rosario that I missed ... hmm ... Arias is probably next man up for me, as his starting ceiling is simply that good.

I might actually argue that Kirk is the most intriguing of the lot. It's close, though. As of this typing, I'd probably go Kirk/Raley/Rusin/Jokisch for those four.

Yeah that was me. I thought it was a fairly interesting discussion we were having here, and was curious about his reasonings for where he placed Vitters (although as usual, BA chopped out some parts of my question ... I think ... which is their right). So I didn't misread the initial tone of the statement ... that the .275/20 is more of a peak. As per my above comments from a page or two ago, I'm in agreement with how Callis feels about Vitters' power - 15 HR seems a bit more realistic to project than 20, although 20 isn't so far out there. Anyhow, I'm glad to see an answer, and thanks for posting this, as I don't check BA's website all that consistently.

To be fair to Fleita, it's not like he didn't want power rotation arms. He did give a rotation look to Dan McDaniel, amongst others, and McDaniel showed an interesting power arm in Boise (his stuff "dropped", but that's a separate issue). Some arms just didn't pan out for Fleita, and there were some poor picks. ___ As for Reed, yeah, I can see them giving him a rotation/piggyback look and keeping him at Peoria for another season, but I really wonder if, due to his mechanics, he's simply better off being fast-tracked as a power pen arm. That will be an interesting decision to follow this spring.

Voted Jensen. I love Bruno personally, but in terms of rankings, he's still a guy who is viewed as only having 1 plus "tool". When you factor in that he was a college bat (and thus, hitting in NWL doesn't mean THAT much), plus some positional uncertainty on his future, there is just a lot of unknown in regards to Bruno's future. Jensen has a very good fastball/breaking ball combination. There's some late-inning potential if shifted to a pen role, but he has enough to continue giving him a look in the rotation until he shows otherwise. In regards to going on, I don't really mind either way, but personally, I think we should probably limit the time that a poll is open because I think it'd be nice to say something is "final" before spring actually begins, particularly with baseball about to gear up for the WBC (first game is March 2nd).

Getting on the nostalgia train ... when I collected baseball cards in my youth, one of my first was that of Jim Bullinger and for some reason, that name always stuck with me (actually, had I stayed in Virginia any longer, I might've been a Mets fan ... all my cards were packed with Mets prospects back in the day, Tim Teufel being one I got a ton).

Thanks for the tweets. The best one was arguably how the kids don't know what a market is. If you make it back Bruce, was wondering what your thoughts/what you've heard on Mark Johnson as a manager? I assume that his approach has to gel somewhat with the what Epstein, Hoyer, and McLeod want, as he was kept around?

Instead of basing their opinion strictly on the .275/20 projection, don't you think it is just as others have said? That BA is weighing his brief time in MLB last year a little too heavily and that's why he is ranked so low? To me, that's the most likely explanation at least. Actually, if I had to take a guess, my guess would be a mixture of three things a) That they wanted to throw a bone out there to Cubs fans and threw out the positive projections they heard when they likely heard a lot more negative projections b) Callis heard something from the Cubs that really soured him on ranking Vitters that high. and c) That he's overrating the short stint in the bigs. I'm not ready to lump it solely as just this, because I seem to recall a few non-Cubs cases that, off the top, that I think Callis did and didn't drop them (I'll doublecheck in the evening if I get a chance), and when you factor in Vitters performance in AAA, it feels like it can't be this on it's own (furthermore, they didn't dock Brett Jackson nearly as much, and he had a glaring flaw ... also last year, Callis suggested at one point that Vitters looked like a possible regular in a chat, so it just feels like it has to be a combination of things that led to this drop). Anyhow, be curious if Callis answered this somewhere on twitter or in a chat. I really just started off with ranking him 25th didn't stun me.

I think I've been overlooking Stuck's numbers last year. Those are pretty damn impressive. I guess the aggressive promotions and mediocre numbers in 2011 put a damper on my opinion of him. I'm going to have to change my vote. There's a lot of things I like about Struck, but he really doesn't have a plus pitch. He does have some velocity on the fastball and decent enough secondaries to keep guys honest, to go along with his aggressive attack mode. I keep wondering if he might be better in the pen, where he can focus on one breaking ball (and perhaps kick up his fastball a notch), but if he's aggressive and throwing strikes with 3 pitches, as he can, he'll be kept as a starter for the near future, just for depth's sake.

Well, there is certainly a measure of ... we know what the other guys can't do (I guess you could call it SNTS). I guess it also comes down to how much one values starting potential. I tend to lean towards, for lack of a better way to phrase it right now, giving a starter a decent bump over a pen arm if they are viewed fairly close. I get the arguments on Rondon and McNutt (think it's a bit unfair to judge numbers on Zych vs. Jensen due to different roles), and as noted, I wonder if they get one last rotation look (although the chances of Rondon getting said look this year is tough ... and therein lies why I have a hard time buying that he'll get a look ... because he'll be age 26 in 2014, assuming we even keep him, and sending him back to AAA to get stretched out at that point ... don't know ... this of course assumes we even keep him). I guess my thinking is this - Jensen's fastball/breaking ball combination (I'm still assuming that in the pen he could consistently hit mid-90's, if not better, without losing much movement ... that velocity would only be a tick above what he can occasionally top out at now as a starter) would still give him late inning potential, putting him on par with the other three, but he seems to have a better chance, as of now, to get a look as a starter, and despite being lower, there's where I'd give a tiny bump to. That said, just to be clear, it's not like I can't understand why those three are ahead (and I voted for Rondon first). I can definitely understand why.

scarey - I've noted that I could be misreading the statement. But if .275/20 is viewed as more of a ... mean ... then it does seem hard to justify placing him at 25th in the system. I mean, based off eyeballing WAR's, that combination (and sub-par defense, a moderately low walk rate), still gives him a shot to be a 1.5-2.5 WAR type guy (again, fully acknowledge that eyeballing WAR's doesn't really work that well), and as jcf pointed out, it's awful hard to make an argument that there are 24 guys in a system that could be better than that at their peak. If .275/20 (and the subpar defense, low walk rate) is more of a mean/optimal ... it really does feel quite difficult to justify a 25th overall ranking in the system considering his age and level. Edit: Just to note, I said somewhere above that I think .275 might be a tick low on a positive scenario (not best case, just positive), while I view 20 HR's as potentially a bit on the high side of a positive case (reasonable, but I'm thinking a tick lower than that).

I really think Jensen should be a tick higher. Not a lot, but a tick. If he was put in the pen, like Rondon/Zych/McNutt, is he that much below them? If not, his mid-rotation ceiling potential should put him on par, if not higher, than those guys (and I recognize I voted for Rondon ahead of Jensen, but I sort of regret that now). I guess, the flip side is that one could argue that Rondon/McNutt could still perhaps be given a look in the rotation in the near future (I still wonder if McNutt gets one last rotation look ... Rondon probably wouldn't get a look this year barring a trade with the Indians to allow them to put him in the minors). Not that any organization's future is made off of it's 30-50 guys in any given year, but this is as strong as a post-30 crop as I can recall in the past few years.