toonsterwu

Don't get me wrong, I get the value discussion as it pertains to the numbers. I don't have a big problem with the AAV ... just not a huge fan of 4 years for Edwin Jackson. All that said, considering his strong 3 year run and the consistent control improvement since Don Cooper got ahold of him with the White Sox in 2010, maybe I should be a bit more excited.

I'm decidedly not excited about 4/52, but .... it's not that bad. Just wonder if, in their minds as of right now (acknowledging that a lot of things can change), this is a swap (signing Jackson and then dealing Garza) or if it's to give them three solid arms in their prime to build around.

Not after this current trade. With Myers gone, the Cubs have the better system. Now, if you are including the young major leaguers, that's a slightly different equation.

I'm a big, big fan of Bruno. There's a certain level of UVA bias there, but the other is that he's got such an excellent hit tool and is a good defensive player. Heck, I still think that, given extended time, he could be decent-solid at short. My problem with ranking him, though, is the same issue I have with Torreyes - guys that make it and excel off one tool are still the exceptions and the not the rule. Thus, to me, these guys have to prove it up the ladder, whether fair or not, and I really, really like Bruno. Now, the catching experiment is a fascinating move. If he can stick behind the plate, and his baseball aptitude is quite high, then he becomes a fascinating catching option if the bat continues to perform. Sort of a better version of Steve Clevenger (who as much as he seems to get bagged on, still profiles as a decent backup backstop). Bruno's more 20-30 for me, a tick below Torreyes because they are similar types with Torreyes ahead in the chain.

Shortened version, as I still have a person from my top 10 so have been beating that horse dead for awhile. 1. Arismendy Alcantara - Young shortstop with good tools, coming off a good offensive season, heading to AA. Are defensive concerns a question of consistency? Offensively, he would profile fine at 2nd as well. 2. Duane Underwood - Pitching ceiling might be the highest in the system. He's just raw, but loads of upside. 3. Matt Szczur - As is ... he has a chance to be a solid depth OF that could be an occasional starter. If he improves his pop a bit more, the chances of becoming a solid starter increase dramatically. 4. Marco Hernandez - Young shortstops with his tools are hard to find. He might have a more complete set of tools than Arismendy. Of course, the poor discipline is what leaves a talented guy like this in the mid-teens. The counter is that he showed improvement in Peoria and Boise during the season, which is a plus. 5. Jeimer Candelario - Love the offensive potential. Offensive ceiling is arguably top 5 in the system ... but there's a lot of projection in there. For a guy that might have to move to first (although if Vogelbach is at the same level, he won't have to do it for awhile), I'd like to see a bit more production to justify a significantly higher nod. It might not be fair, but the way he tailed off was disappointing, even while I recognize how young he was.

Too many teams looking for a shortstop to think that he'd move to another position at this stage. I actually like the job Cherington's doing in Boston right now, getting some stopgap pieces that could make them competitive now, while building for the future. Of course, there's a big decision coming down the pike soon for Cherington with Jacoby Ellsbury. As a side note, I understand what the Blue Jays are doing, opening their window and hoping for a run. But ... I'm not sure, on paper, that the Blue Jays are necessarily better than the other AL East teams right now, and well, they've basically got a 2-3 year window where they have to win. In saying that, I guess I do appreciate a GM that, at some point, decides to go for it, and I understand that this might be the Blue Jays best chance. I just wonder if they wouldn't have been better off pursuing a cheaper starter and keeping one (or both) of d'Arnaud/Syndegaard. No, Dickey is not a one year fluke in that he's shown himself to be a solid starter for 3 years now, but can he pitch at the quality he pitched at last year? I don't know, and if he's closer to 2010/2011, I just wonder if d'Arnaud/Syndegaard and say ... Edwin Jackson (randomly picking a FA starter) might have made more sense than Dickey.

Btw, I'd offer up that at some point, Rob Whitenack probably deserves a trial if only due to his 40 man status. I'm not so sure that I would necessarily put Loux ahead of him, as Whitenack's ceiling might be a tick better, and he's basically a more polished version of Wells (think Wells ceiling is a better). Furthermore, next year iss his 2nd year off TJ.

We're getting to the "depth" of the system now, where a lot of guys really are lumped close together and it'll be a beauty is in the eye of the beholder type situation, IMO, so I'll be curious how these vote totals play out compared to some of the earlier votes (granted, a few guys in the top 11 came in lower for me). But 1. Arismendy Alcantara - I've been beating this horse for a few picks now. I've said it here and other places - I don't necessarily "buy" Alcantara in terms of, I'm going to the bank with this guy as a bet for becoming a good major leaguer. But ... 2013 will be his age 21 season. A 21 year old shortstop, entering AA, coming off a good season offensively in A+ is an intriguing asset. He doesn't strike out a ton, although I'll be curious how his approach holds up in AA. I'm really not sure Christian Villanueva's offensive tools are that much better than Alcantara's. Everyone looks at Alcantara's power, or lack thereof in Peoria, but well, a lot of people struggle in MWL, particularly kids. There are shortstop tools. I know a poster has questioned whether he will outgrow shortstop. I just don't know if I see it based on raw body-point analysis (bad weight is a separate factor and something that I could not guess on). If he doesn't outgrow short, the tools for the position are there right now, and it would be a question of whether or not he could be more consistent. 2. Matt Szczur - The fact that he's "raw" to baseball shouldn't mean anything much anymore. He's had multiple professional seasons, and at a certain age, well, age is age, and he'll turn 24 next year. Thus, I can understand the concerns on him. A 23-24 year old CF who struggled in his first go-around in AA and hasn't shown much power isn't going to make anyone jump for excitement. That said, I don't buy yet that his ability to make contact was exposed in AA. It's interesting to see that it seemed like he was trying to lift the ball a bit more in AA. There's raw power there, but what he needs to do is strike a balance. At his best, he's taking advantage of his quickness and speed combination, slapping the ball around and getting on base, while occasionally driving one to keep pitchers honest. Can he fix his swing to achieve this? I don't know, but the way I look at it is, if I don't buy that his contact ability was exposed, then the dramatically improved discipline/approach still him a potentially good 4th/5th OF with speed/defense who can start in certain situations or when he has a hot year. If he fixes his swing to the point that he's getting on base and driving the ball a bit more, then the potential to be a solid starter is there. For now, that gets the edge over raw talent in the next two slots. I'm still tossing over the next two in some fashion, but 3a. Duane Underwood - Others have a legitimate argument of Underwood to be much higher. The case can be made that his pitching ceiling is the highest in the entire system, and even though we're talking a pitcher, that potential could be enough justification to put him much higher. I'd just like to see him polish things up and show some consistency before I jump too high for him. 3b. Marco Hernandez - Since only 3 votes can be made, I went Underwood for now. What's somewhat lost in Marco's season is that almost all the positive comments about his tools were shown this year. He's not considered a threat to outgrow short. He has excellent bat speed. Marco looks to have a solid arm for short, and he shows the ability to drive the ball and could potentially be that 10-15 HR's hitter some have noted. The range, speed, and movement at short is fine, and he has the ability to be a solid base-runner. There's a lot to like, but the discipline was the most troubling aspect. That said ... the K rate dropped and the BB rate increased as he spent more time in Peoria and Boise. So he was making adjustments, and once the approach improved at both spots, the offense came around. It's almost forgotten that when he was demoted, he was showing a lot of positive signs in Peoria. I'm curious to see what his GB rate is like in Peoria next year, as it was noticeably lower than it was in Boise this past year. He won't hit 21 until late in 2013, so he's age appropriate. There aren't that many shortstop talents in the entire minors with his level of all-around potential. The next three would probably be Candelario, Amaya, and maybe Lake for me. Marco's position and Duane's ceiling is enough of an edge on those two for me, for now. I love Candelario's offensive ceiling, but there's a lot of projection there, and with the expectation that he might move to first eventually (granted, being on the same development level as Vogelbach will likely keep him at 3rd, or maybe move him to the OF), he needs to mash and I want to see that materialize. There's a lot to like about Amaya, but the offense is really going to have to carry him. It could, so he could deserve to much higher, and his ceiling as a potentially offensive minded 2nd baseman that can get on base and has some pop is arguably more fascinating than a lot of other options that are at 2nd, or could end up there. I actually wonder if his power is being a bit under-sold this offseason, by a tiny smidgen. Still ... Marco's on the same level, shows offensive potential that's close to Amaya's (Gioskar should hit for a better average if he develops), and is a shortstop. That gets the edge for now. Lake's a tough one to place for me. I think he could see the bigs next year. He's only 23 next year. If he ever put it together, he could be a monster offensive player. I'm just not sure how much I buy him putting it together, and I wonder how the approach holds as he faces smarter pitchers that don't try to simply blow it by you. I really like Loux, and have always acknowledged my fascination with Wells, but health is too big a concern for me, for now, to push them ahead of the positional guys.

Pierce Johnson. This is about where I have him anyways, so it's not a case, for me, of liking Johnson a lot more. That said, I'm not much of a believer in Vitters ability to be potentially better than an average offensive third baseman in the bigs, and his defense at 3rd is clearly, much as I've defended it at times, below average. Johnson is a polished college arm. If you believe in the quality of the breaking ball, that is, if you believe the breaking ball is plus, the combination of pedigree and stuff arguably should put him, even with his health concerns, far higher on this list.

This is the winter of crazy trades. For all the crap heaped upon the Royals, I dislike this trade for the Blue Jays, barring a top prospect going back to them, much more than the Wil Myers and Co. for Shields and Davis swap. As much as I always felt Aaron Sanchez was the best of that trio of Blue Jays arms at the same level (Nicolino and Syndegaard), Syndegaard and d'Arnaud? It's funny how the chatter that I've seen says TDA isn't an elite defender. Honestly, I never expected that. He was supposed to be a plus offensive catcher that was decent-solid behind the plate, or at least, that was my impression. That package for RA Dickey? Damn if Sandy Alderson didn't luck into a magic pot of gold. Do I understand the move from the Blue Jays perspective? Sort of ... but that's really buying RA Dickey maintaining everything at a high level, which I'm wary of. I mean, I've been so focused on these three blockbusters, I completely forgot that the Blue Jays kicked things off with that ridiculously huge Josh Johnson/Mark Buehrle/Jose Reyes deal. Compared to the recent trades, that was a steal for them. I said this a few pages back, but I'd be damn curious what Jeff Samardzija could net in the trade market. There's more than enough teams that are still looking for pitching. Don't expect it to happen, but damn, this sure is a crazy winter of big trades involving top prospects.

I keep thinking that it's a shame that we don't have a few assets that can be traded (for quality returns) this offseason. It sure seems like a lot of teams have decided that, after years of building, they can't wait anymore (Toronto, Kansas City, Seattle come to mind). Add in the usual big spenders, and there's a lot of teams still looking for stuff, with the top wave of FA's off the field. A lot of quality prospects sure are being discussed and moved. (Travis d'Arnaud in any package for RA Dickey seems stunning, unless the Mets fork over a very solid prospect) I still don't expect it (and like before, I'm not necessarily pushing for it either), but I still occasionally wonder what a Jeff Samardzija could net in this market and whether or not it would be worth it to move him.

I hope, if we are asking people to pick 3, that everyone picks 3, otherwise it could unnecessarily skew some results. _____ Since voting should also be a forum for discussion ... I really like Jeimer Candelario. On pure offensive upside, he's arguably top 5 in the system. That said, there's so much of it that is projection. The power isn't there yet. Add in his struggles down the stretch, and the expected move to a corner role, and while it shouldn't be a knock on him for struggling in Boise at his age, I also don't know how high I can go with him. On pure upside, Underwood probably is at, or near the top, but like Candelario, both have a lot of question marks. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if both of these guys were top 100-150 players after this year, and that both guys made a case to be top 5 in the Cubs system next year. Just think they are a bit too raw for me here, but you could make a case for both of these guys as high as 6.

I'm really not a fan of the pick 3, but since we've been doing that, might as well go back to it. I also think we need to set some boundary on what justifies a player being placed on automatically. That said, may be a bit too late. But Maples had below 20% of the vote. Paniagua had more votes in his cycle than Villanueva did. There was enough to suspect that Paniagua would go on automatically. All we needed was a few votes swinging to Pierce Johnson or Josh Vitters, which seemed plausible since many factor in "readiness" as an aspect, to force a potential run-off at 9. Anyhow, next 3 for me would be 1A) Arismendy Alcantara - I guess I'll be the lone guy pushing him here. I get that Underwood has better upside, but he's raw and ridiculously far away, the secondaries need work, and it seems like a bet on the fastball right now to put him here (granted I'd have him ahead of Maples). I can see the argument of Vitters, but I'm not sure I buy his bat as being above average at the next level, and his defense wears him down. I know there are concerns about Alcantara's defense, but I'm not sure he grows that much mroe, and as of now, the tools are there to play short. The bat is still a concern of mine as well, but it showed well. Again ... I wouldn't bet on him, but it's a damn enticing package here, a shortstop at his age, entering AA, coming off a heck of a season, albeit shortened. 1B) Pierce Johnson - I almost wonder if I'm selling him short here. He arguably could go higher. I just don't know how quality the breaking stuff is. If you buy the breaking stuff, as a polished college arm, he really should be higher than this. IIRC, prior to his injury, there was talk of mid-late first for him, so the pedigree, as viewed by scouts, was solid. I may end up thinking that Johnson should be ahead of Alcantara). Then it gets a bit tougher. A ton of names to toss around, and I'm leaning 3 in particular, Szczur, Marco Hernandez, and Duane Underwood. If I felt comfortable with Ben Wells health, he'd be in the mix. For now, I'm leaning Szczur, as the other two are far away, and as is right now, Szczur looks like a solid 4th OF that could, in the right situation, be a starter, and he has a bit more potential upside.

Tim, I think we need to know what you want to do with it. I don't think we need a runoff, but that may be my bias. Would you want to put Maples in at 9 and jump to 10? Or would you prefer a runoff? Or do we put Villanueva on and move onto 9? Davell is right that past precedent would, much as I would disagree with it, suggest that Maples gets put on here. I guess, if Tim is that busy, this can be thrown out to everyone and then someone can pick up the banner and roll with the next poll. Personally, my preference is to do a vote at 9, but davell is right that we just put Paniagua on. Of course, both Paniagua and Jackson, last round, had more votes than Villanueva this round, and we have similar vote totals as I write this (130 vs. 133). Perhaps we should put a baseline on for when we put two on (say, a guy has past 20% of the total votes and is within 3-5 of the top vote-getter and is say, a healthy amount of votes ahead of 3rd place, say, 6-8). Then again, that might be my own bias (I really don't see the case for Maples here, and that 20% marker would admittedly knock Maples out of an automatic add). Don't know, a lot of ways we could skin. Again, my preference is to put Villanueva on, set up a barrier for when we skip ahead, and move onto 9. As a total side note, I find it interesting that everyone but Marco Hernandez has gotten a vote. Edit: Would also add that we should probably set a time limit on each vote, otherwise it'll take a heck of a long time. Maybe 48 hours, just to give people enough time. Or maybe we go with something like once we get to X number of votes, we can make a judgment based on the data available.

Then you wait some more. At this stage, with what's left, I just don't know if you need to jump into any multi-year commitments (well, I can live with 2 year deals for some of the guys left, and maybe 3 for Jackson, so I guess there are certain cases), which is the likely cost of business with the top guys left available in FA.

As for next move, I'm of the opinion that ... we sort of wait (unless the deal is too good to not do it). There tends to be a few guys that over-play their FA hands each year and end up taking short term deals. At this stage, who really excites people out there in terms of a long-term deal? Edwin Jackson has flashes of brilliance, and then he has flashes of "WTF!" outings. Do I want to give 4-5 years for him? Not really. If we can get Marcum on a 2 year deal, I'd much rather take that. Maybe Liriano doesn't get his long term deal and takes a short term prove it deal. I wonder if someone from the remaining OF's (guys like Hairston/Ross) end up settling for a one year deal. Maybe you take some injury gambles. Is Grady Sizemore still out there? If so, why not? Moreover, now that Hamilton and the big fish are signed, we can sit back and see if the trade markets open up a bit. Maybe a team revisits Soriano now that there isn't that much power left on the market. Maybe a team dangles an excess SP (Dodgers come to mind). I guess the popular trade idea right now is trading Marmol to the Tigers for a SP, but I'm just not sure that the Marmol market is there right now, not with enough key FA pen arms available. Short of it is, I just don't see anyone I really want to jump on with multiple years. Sanchez made sense. Maybe Jackson, but I'm just not enthused about him.

Didn't Torres sign yesterday with the Giants?

I really don't know if we should automatically put Maples on. Granted, there's a wide enough gap from Maples to Vitters/Johnson, but I guess I just wonder if extending it out one more vote would see someone pass him. Maybe that's me, though. Heck, if I'm putting a young arm on, I'd go Underwood ahead of Maples because Underwood's ceiling is arguably higher and he doesn't have the mechanical concerns (granted, neither would be in my next 3, assuming Villanueva made it on).

On paper, it's pretty bad that they basically missed out on A, B, C, and D for their plans this winter (by most accounts), but I wonder if this might end up being a blessing in disguise for them. Considering what KC gave up, they probably would've had to fork over Profar or Olt to get Shields. Now, they can rebuild (and the team should still be pretty good as is) by giving time to Profar/Olt if they want to, let their young arms get a chance to fill the final rotation spot or two, knowing that they have a potentially excellent pen to back it up (and a pen that could get better midseason when Feliz returns). They can use other minor league assets around midseason to make a trade (perhaps for a Matt Garza). On paper, this is a team that can still compete in the AL West next year. The Mariners are stuck in development, and the A's don't look, on paper, to be a juggernaut. The Angels have an excellent offense, but the pitching is a bit spotty. All that said, wouldn't surprise me to wake up one day in the next two weeks and hear that the Rangers have made a big deal.

Color me a tad surprised that, prior to the Cubs, no other team supposedly offered him a 5 year deal. Considering his age, stuff, recent performance record, I find that ... puzzling in a market that doesn't have that much pitching to get excited about. Sure feels like this is the Tigers game right now. If they want him, he's there's. If not, he's a very nice addition to Samardzija (assuming the Cubs extend Shark). I don't know if I'd do 5/75 for Edwin Jackson. He's improved his command, but he's still prone to bouts of wildness on occasion.

I'm going Christian Villanueva - Don't really like it here, but he seems the safest of the bunch that's left because of his defensive ability at 3rd. I'm just not sure how much power he's going to have, though. That said, he edges out Arismendy Alcantara - There's just too much inconsistency, offensively and defensively, plus the fact that he's coming off an injury. That said, he put together an excellent season, is so damn young, and has the potential to stick at short. If he moves to 2nd, whether due to his defensive consistency or the fact that there's a guy called Starlin, he has the bat potential to profile there. PIerce Johnson - I guess I could see an argument for him at 8 on account of the polished college arm aspect, with 3 pitches. I just want to get a better gauge on the quality of his breaking ball. It's close for me on all three.

They vowed to never let him throw his cutter. Oh that. You know, I didn't have a big issue with that and hadn't thought about it in a long time. I read their defense for it, and it seemed reasonable enough (there was a Rick Peterson interview somewhere that got into issues with the cutter's grip). Certain organizations have certain philosophies. Is it the right move? I don't know, but there defense for making the move is enough that I can swallow it for now.

I guess I'm not impatient, but that might be because of my expectations, or lackthereof. The problem is, what moves can the Cubs make now? It seems clear they are trying to drum up a market, any market for Alfonso Soriano. They'll eat money, but they want something somewhat intriguing. I don't think the Soriano market, if there is one, will move until Hamilton comes off the board (with Upton gone, wouldn't surprise me if Jon Daniels decided to sign Hamilton soon, if they can reach an accord). Marmol's probably going to be a tough move in the near future. I think if Marmol is moved, it's probably an in-season, perhaps June type move, if a team's closer goes down. There's still enough arms out there, and teams are willing to gamble on guys closing. After that? For all the talk about a top prospect for top prospect swap, that never seemed that realistic this early. Teams tend to hold onto their key guys, and the Cubs key guys are just a little too far away as of now. Garza wasn't a likely move this winter. There just isn't that much in the hand that Epstein/Hoyer have to play with right now.

Wait ... how are the Orioles screwing up Bundy? I've been a touch busy, but I haven't noticed anything to get concerned about, since I'm somewhat partial to my local teams. Did I miss something?

Relative to the Diamondbacks needs (a good defensive minded shortstop that was close to ready), Gregorius makes a lot more sense for them than Lake or Alcantara. Whether or not they bought Barney as a shortstop, I don't know. Gregorius has a bit more offensive upside/ceiling than what Barney has shown. ________ All that said, I'm baffled at the trade, and yet, sort of not. I'm not because the rumors had suggested for awhile that there were issues between Bauer and the Arizona FO, and that the FO might not view Bauer as highly. To me, that's a fault of their scouting department in that, it was well known that Bauer preferred to do things certain ways. That said, this is still fairly baffling in that, one would think that Bauer had enough value to net a higher ceiling talent than Gregorius. Maybe I'm selling Gregorius short, but as good as he is defensively, his offensive ceiling doesn't look that much better than Darwin Barney's.