toonsterwu

Rondon and then going off first instinct, which as of now is Jensen/Blackburn in some order. The reports on Rondon are too good for me to pass up - it seems like there's potential late inning potential out of the pen, and he had mid-rotation potential earlier in his career as a starter. After that, I really wanted to pull the trigger on Jose Rosario, but without knowing more about the specific arm issues, it's just hard to right now, and I've never really loved him as a starting arm. I'm just not ready to pull the trigger on Zych without seeing a more consistent breaking ball. Martin's a thought, and I might revisit it, but he probably has to make some swing changes, so I'm a bit hesitant as a result.

Both have arm issues to be concerned with at this moment in time, so the question for me is, does Loux's polish/readiness overcome Wells upside? For me, the answer is an easy no, particularly since Wells has youth and frame to his advantage as it pertains to the potential of working through whatever the specific issues were last year. Edit: Meant to say Loux's polish/readiness (not ceiling) vs. Wells upside

Since I'm bored and waiting right now ... If the Rangers came calling for Castro, I'd start with Profar AND Olt. No way I would go any lower than that. I would not let Andrus be a centerpiece to a deal (that is, one of the top 2 pieces). I'd probably ask for Derek Holland as well (I really haven't thought that much about a possible Castro-Rangers trade, so shooting from the hip here), and probably another minor league piece or two (I really don't love the rest of their system as much as others). Short of it is, I'd want a boatload of young talent. Hmm ... leaving aside the same division dynamic for a moment, with the Cardinals, a comparable trade package that I'd want would be something like Oscar Taveras, 2 from the Miller/Rosenthal/Martinez trio, and a 1 or 2 secondary pieces. Basically, I'd want three prime prospects to make a deal, or 2 prime prospects and one young/young-ish major leaguer, and some secondary pieces. Castro's age, performance, upside, and deal should be able to net that.

Talked about how barren the pitching was when Theo and Jed got here and how most of those pitchers already here regressed or weren't good (Rhee, Simpson, McNutt, Maples, Raley, Rusin, etc). Said the best acquisition they've made might be the new minor league pitching coordinator, Derek Johnson. Highlighted Pierce Johnson and Arodys Vizcaino as big acquisitions in the past year, briefly mentioned Paniagua, Blackburn and Underwood. Vizcaino should be on the mound in March and back to full strength by June. The upcoming draft should help keep building up the arms (college specifically); they mentioned Manea, Appel, Stanek, Crawford, Whitson and Wahl. Hey Raisin, did the article lump Maples in as regressed or not good? That would be mildly interesting, considering the hype he's gotten from some quarters this winter (Hulet having him top 10).

My first reaction on that rumored package is ... that's it? I thought they were shooting for the moon for Upton, based on some of the reports about how they were asking for a ton. That's a lot to give up, but it seems decently reasonable. I would've thought that the Diamondbacks might've wanted someone like Kyle Seagar. The Cubs issue would be that the Diamondbacks strength is with young positional players in the big leagues right now, and we lack a top shelf pitching prospect to send in return. I can definitely see why the Mariners would do this deal - getting an impact player through trading from their depth in pitching prospects, some pen arms, and a good IF prospect. ____ davell - I think Furbush is a bit better than Russell out of the pen. But I think there's a wide gap from Villanueva to Nick Franklin. At the end of the day, the biggest issue/difference is the lack of top shelf, close to ready pitching prospects (assuming the presence of the Mariners Big 3 is part of the reason why the Diamondbacks liked the deal, which seems logical).

Schoop struggled in a+ and aa. I know folks expect more considering his age and frame, but he sure doesn't seem ready.

I guess I don't really have a problem with Loux getting on here, but I'm still not sure his ceiling is really mid-rotation, and hence why I haven't been voting for him. Manuel and Eddy, in their writeup of Loux when we got him, indicated a 5th starter, and suggested that it was average fastball velocity, average breaking ball, with a slightly better changeup. A guy like Jensen feels like he has a tick better ceiling. Wells/Whitenack have far superior stuff (with all three (including Loux) having some health concerns). That stuff report on Loux sounds very similar to Marcelo Carreno or Nick Struck.

Seems weird to me that the Cubs would (supposedly) trade pitching to get Porcello. I really wouldn't be surprised if Morse was sent up the highway to Baltimore, where they could still use a big bat at 1st (moving Chris Davis to DH full-time). Nationals have some pen holes now, and the Orioles have pen depth, so that seems a swap that makes sense. ______ I wouldn't mind taking a gamble on Porcello. I think that's a good gamble for this FO if the price is right. That said, the trade as reported still doesn't make a ton of sense to me. Orioles may consider moving Hardy to move Machado to short, but who are they going to find for 3rd? The system doesn't have anyone really ready to go. They are already still looking for a first baseman/DH.

Loux - hopefully for the last time? Blackburn - Purely on upside. Bruno - a personal favorite. Needs to keep hitting as he moves up. Anyone think he skips KC and goes to A+? Jensen is next on my list. Maybe I could even rank him above Bruno and Blackburn. Looks like Loux has a shot to get on. I love Bruno. Part of it is UVA bias, as I'm a UVA fan, but love Bruno. That said, I've got a tough time putting him in my top 30. I said midseason that I could see him as our 2nd baseman of the future ... but his only plus tool is his potential to make contact, and as a college bat, we really need to see him higher up to see if that holds. Now, I still think he could be passable to solid at short, and I think there might be some more pop, but with a limited plus tool, it's hard for me to rank him high. It's the same reason I just can't rank Torreyes that high either, and those two are similar guys, with Torreyes deserving to be higher on account of level. Bruno could see A+. If the catching thing is something they go with entering the season, I think he probably starts in A, or even XST, but if he is kept in the IF, he's got a chance to jump up there and perhaps play 2nd/3rd. All comes down to this catching thing.

My take: 1. Off the top, his 2nd base defense should be average, if not better than average. 2. This one is what pushes him down for me. I'm too lazy to go to firstinning right now, but I'm almost certain that it's been two straight summers where he's struggled early on, only to heat up in the summer. 3. Sure. Don't get me wrong, I think he can be a big leaguer. I just doubt his potential to be a starter, hence why I have Whitenack ahead, but Watkins should be able to fill a utility role because 4. His SS defense is ... livable/passable, and he can play the OF. Wouldn't want him at short long term (if Castro got hurt and he had to play, would rather shift Barney over to short).

Roch is a fairly knowledgeable guy with a solid track record, so if he says there's whispers, then I believe he's heard whispers. The implication of his report seems to be (unless I'm misreading it) that the Tigers don't believe the Cubs have a fit in a 2-way deal for Porcello and would like to expand to add JJ Hardy from the Orioles. I really don't see the Orioles moving Hardy unless they can get a quality third baseman somehow (moving Machado to short), and I don't know who that is. I think the Orioles are willing to go into the year with Machado at 3rd again, so it would probably take a hefty deal to convince them to make said move. It's an interesting rumor if the implication is adding another SP to the mix.

Candelario at catcher? Hmm ... I had never pondered that. It's an interesting thought. I doubt they ponder that type of move unless he absolutely crashes and burns in the field. Cubswin - I love Candelario's ceiling, and I can see a case, based off ceiling, to put him top 10. The way he tailed off, plus the fact that the power is more projection than what's there right now, is what pushes me to, personally, put him more in that 9-14 range.

Humbled enough? Wasn't he reportedly picking things up well in Boise two years ago, considering how raw he was? Maybe I'm thinking of someone else, but I don't recall anything about Golden being a bad student of the game.

I may change my vote on the third pick of this later on, so here's hoping my top 2 hold on, giving me some more time to contemplate it. But 1. Hector Rondon - He has enough pedigree that the positive reports out of winter ball push him up. 2. Ben Wells - We're talking mid-20's here for a guy who, had he continued his early season success, might've been top 10. I'm assuming that the health decision was one the organization agreed with, so ... this seems like a sufficient enough drop. So ... then comes the hard part ... A part of me leans Paul Blackburn (draft pedigree), another part of me leans Jose Rosario (performance/upside) ... craig has talked up Zych enough that I even give that some thought ... I also ponder Jose Arias here due to his immense ceiling, but 3. Michael Jensen - This is my nod for now. Fastball/breaking ball look solid. I'm not enthusiastic about this, as I'm still not sure if I feel like he's a starter or better off in the pen, but he had a good run in Peoria this year and the stuff is solid.

Watkins is the one guy that I readily acknowledge that my initial perception of him may be coloring my views on him right now, as I'm just not sure he's a starter. That said, I readily acknowledge that bias and will acknowledge that if he's anywhere closer to his hot offensive summer months the last two years than the other months, then yes, there is starting potential there. That said, I just am not sure I buy him as a starting caliber 2nd baseman as of now, and as such, I go with the mid-rotation ceiling upper level arm whose velocity has worked it's way back.

You know, another guy that I wonder if I got sucked into over-rating a bit is Paniagua. This isn't to say Paniagua isn't good, but having him solidly in the top 6-8 seems just a tick high. There's just a lot of assumptions on Paniagua that led to him going so high for some of us, such as his ability to hold his velocity, the breaking ball assumed as showing well, the assumption that he's more polished, and so forth, but really ... he's a nice, high ceiling raw arm, like Underwood and Maples (neither guy being in my top 10). The one ranking that sort of surprised me was Candelario at 8. Love the ceiling, but a lot of development to get to said ceiling.

The other shocking one was Alberto Cabrera with the best slider, and I've long argued that his breaking ball was better than given credit for ... but best?

I've always said I might be unfair to Pierce Johnson. I said this to someone the other day, I forget who, but if Pierce Johnson's breaking ball is legitimately consistently plus, then we've all under-rated him, including perhaps this BA ranking, because a college arm with 2 consistent, plus pitches should be high. For me, the couple reports that were lukewarm about his breaking ball just made me cautious. I'm not even all that bothered by his health history - it's simply the breaking ball for me.

craig, I think we discussed this, or at least, I've said it elsewhere. I'm actually not a big Alcantara guy. I try to rank as best as possible in removing my biases (doesn't always work, I see the case some make for Logan Watkins to go higher, but I just can't pull that trigger). If I was big on any shortstop in the system, it's still Marco Hernandez. That said, I've always thought the case for Alcantara to be high was much better than people acknowledged. Offensively, assuming you are defining useful big league power as average power potential (say 10-12 HR's, maybe a tick more on a good year, a tick less on a bad year, a healthy amount of gap hits), the bat speed and loft in the swing is there to project for average power. He actually had a very good percentage on SB's this past year BUT ... I wouldn't expect him to be a 20+ steals guy on a consistent basis (more on this a bit later). I don't know - call this a gut feeling, but I just don't know if I expect that. I could see him do that in his youth, but as he gets older, I'd guess a 10-15 SB a year type of guy. There's enough raw speed (not saying it's plus) that he could be a 20+SB guy on a consistent basis. Offensively, he can profile for 2nd. C and D are the two big issues. If there's a reason that I'm not big on Alcantara, it's because when I see him, I really still have concerns that he might get exposed against upper level pitching, as he still seems fairly aggressive (then again, so is Villanueva). Without a bigger sample size of games, though, that could be viewer bias. The other big issue is his defense. Now, I believe, at this moment in time, the raw tools are there to stick at short, and the question is whether or not he can tidy things up and become more consistent. I have heard some people (there was a poster somewhere) who argued that they felt he was thickening up, and that he might grow out of having the raw tools to be at short (which could limit his SB ability). Body-point analysis, which is all we have unless someone has insights with the Cubs medical staff, is still more guesswork than actual assessment (Although the NFL actually does a very good job with this). I'm not actually convinced that Alcantara will add a lot more size to his frame (natural weight that is, if he wants to gorge on McDonald's, I can't predict that). Without having clear knowledge of whether or not he's a good student and can learn, I can't really assess if there's anything that he can't improve from a technique perspective. What I've seen, I think it can be improved, but again ... a lot of guess/gut work here. But ... I've always thought the case for Alcantara was fairly strong. Average power potential, potential to stick at short, youth, and good bat speed. Add in production from this past season, and it's a good case.

The question should be, and I got sucked into ranking Villanueva higher than I really wanted to ... why should they be high on Villanueva? I kept asking people ... why should Villanueva be ahead of Alcantara? Their offensive projections are similar, and Alcantara, while he has some issues defensively, as of now, he has the tools to potentially stick at short. So ... a shortstop or a third baseman with similar offensive projections? That said, I completely forgot Fujikawa was eligible. Wouldn't surprise me if Villanueva was next man up.

Leaving aside the fact that I really don't see that busy of an offseason (and a Garza deal wouldn't happen until Spring anyways, in all likelihood, and that's probably as early as it could happens), you feel comfortable that that rotation can lead us to slightly above .500 with that lineup? I think that team would be much improved, but Edwin Jackson can still go through spells of inconsistency where he looks more like a 4/5 starter (take a look at his numbers last year), and Feldman/Baker/Wood/Villanueva/etceteras all look like end of the rotation options. I guess, let me rephrase - I wouldn't rule out such a thing happening, but that seems to be asking for this rotation to over-achieve. Nothing's impossible, and career years happen, but if that lineup, with that rotation, got us near .500, I'd be pleased. Couple side points - 1. An Upton trade would likely eat into a lot of resources. At the very least, it would almost certainly take Javier Baez. To assume that we would definitely have enough pieces to make a Price or Felix trade next offseason after an Upton move now? Not impossible, but that really depends on a lot of success stories with our top prospects this year. We're a much improved system, but I'm not sure, as of now, we can say we are a good enough system to definitely make two mega deals in back to back offseasons without a lot of luck in the development side of things. 2. Actually, I was sniffing around for a Cano post. I see this popping up everywhere these days - Cubs making a run at Cano. I'd love it ... but I really don't see any way the Yankees let Cano go. The talk has always been that Cano really loves being in New York. For any unhappiness he may express, it's well-acknowledged that, while Jeter is the face of the team, Cano is the alpha dog, the anchor that makes things go. For all the talk about the Yankees cutting their payroll, I think they will do everything possible to find room for Cano. I really don't see Cano getting to free agency, and wouldn't be surprised if the Yankees locked him up before this upcoming season.

1. Rondon - The reports seem that good. I really don't know where to place him, tbh, but considering Whitenack/Wells are my next two, two guys that have some lingering health issues, this seems like a decent place. I could go any order on the three and feel fine. 2. Whitenack - Mid-rotation ceiling when he was healthy. The velocity reports aren't as good as his peak form in 2011, when he supposedly could top out in the mid-90's, but the fact that he's close is positive. 3. Wells - Ceiling's probably a tick higher than Whitenack's, but the lingering health question just makes it hard. Healthy, he's probably a good 10+ spots higher (assuming he had continued his early season production). 4. Watkins - My bias may be getting in the way here, but I've never been convinced completely that he was a starter, and that bias still holds. I think he's a very good utility man that can have hot offensive runs, but since that is clouding my view on things, I just can't put him ahead of Whitenack/Wells, despite their TJS.

This post makes WSR's love for Golden look justified. Really? How so? That's sort of a ridiculous and insulting comment, IMO. I really have no [expletive] idea how to respond to this. If you made the argument that craig made, fine. But no where in there did I say that he would be a top 50 prospect. Heck, you are saying that WSR arguing for Golden, a guy almost no one is putting in the top 20 right now, is the same as me advocating for Marco at 18 on this list, a guy almost everyone has top 20, and many have top 15. Golden isn't a guy that is considered a top 20 prospect by most, people, whereas Marco is. I didn't advocate for Marco in the top 10 - only around 12/13 (too lazy to check right now). If you wanted to argue that Profar's age being younger makes that comment ridiculous, fine. But Profar finished last year in A ball (with minor splits issues, IIRC ... albeit not like Marco's but that's an interesting side note ... his splits, IIRC, were actually pretty horrendous in the NWL), so development happened within a year. What did I say at the end? Enough to hope on tools? How is anything I said anywhere remotely as ridiculous as comparing my arguing for Marco at 18 to WSR arguing for Golden in the [expletive] top 20? I really don't [expletive] get jackass comments like that. If you made a legitimate argument, I could get that, but there's nothing legitimate ... it's just a bunch of [expletive] drivel. Craig's comment and argument I get (again, people forget how awful Profar's splits were in the NWL, so it's not like development can't occur). Heck, if craig is willing to share (and if I'm breaking confidences, I apologize), I would ask him to show the comment that he got on Marco Hernandez from his source as it pertains to Marco's potential. What I simply argued is that, if all goes well with both players, Marco Hernandez has the higher ceiling than Amaya. I imagine you are reacting this way because of my comment on comparing Marco's ceiling to some of the top shortstops and the top 50 comment. If that top 50 comment is some sort of issue, then I don't know what to say [expletive] say because I said that is, a potential top 50 type prospect down the line if there's positive development. How is that a ridiculous comment, unless you don't think he has the tools? Go compare reports of Profar/Lindor/Lee's ceiling to Hernandez and tell me how I'm wrong in a discussion on ceiling. I imagine, particularly, that the comparison to Profar is what's standing out. People act like Profar is going to be some ridiculous offensive stud. I think people forget that Profar's offensive ability being viewed as excellent is in the context of position. He's not likely to be Miguel Cabrera. He's going to be a very good offensive player overall, but an excellent offensive player for his position. Profar also doesn't have superb top of the line tools, but rather, very good tools and a lot of polish. Don't forget that there's legitimate debate on how much power Profar will have. He has average speed, maybe a tick above, but good range and lateral movement, along with instincts. So again, I ask, where I am wrong in saying where is the major difference between Marco's ceiling and Profar's ceiling? Where am I wrong in saying Marco is a shortstop that has some potential power, solid defensively ability, and bat speed. I can actually find public comments that note all three. No where in there am I discussing the probability yet of Marco to reach said ceiling, as I simply noted that's enough to hope on the tools. And yes, I am sort of pissed at this type of ridiculous [expletive] comment.

The difficulty I have with placing him is that his ceiling is admittedly not as high as some others like Paniagua/Maples/Underwood (I mean, would it be that incredulous to argue that a healthy Arturo Maltos-Garcia, that is, the AMG of 2 years ago, has a close ceiling). So your hoping that the reports of him being a polished arm is true and that he moves fast for a young arm. I think he's close, but that's why I haven't given Blackburn any thought yet.

We're getting into a messy, clumped up area for the system. 1. Alberto Cabrera - Potential late inning arm. I don't buy the starting experiment, but his potential to be a late inning arm is enough considering that's he's in the upper level. 2. Robert Whitenack - I'd love to go Ben Wells here but ... Whitenack's more developed and polished. I think Wells ceiling is better, but the fact that Whitenack is more developed and that both have injury concerns is enough to tilt things. 3. Hector Rondon - The reports seem to be that good out of winter league. 4. Ben Wells - If he was healthy, he'd go far higher. Mid-20's seem reasonable for a youngster with a good frame, a plus fastball, showed development on his secondary stuff, had a positive performance this year ... but has that lingering health issue that's gotten everyone's attention. 5. Logan Watkins - I'm admittedly not on the Watkins train yet. I just wonder if he's more of a utility guy than a starter.