toonsterwu

I hope things don't go wrong either, but more often than not, it's a safer bet to assume that at least one of a team's top 3-4 prospects will falter. In saying that ... how is 2016 ... negative? To me, it seems like a decently positive scenario. Not a great scenario, but decently positive. Early signs point to Soler starting in Peoria. If that's the case, 2013 starts in Peoria and maybe finishes in Daytona. Maybe Tennessee. At some point in 2014, if all goes well, he goes through some combination of Daytona/Tennessee/Iowa, maybe a cup of tea in the bigs. 2015 would be "finishing school" in AAA. That seems decently positive for a guy who has some swing kinks to work out. As for Vizcaino, I guess I can buy the idea that, after a spell in the minors, they might call him up on some sort of innings limit as a starter. But considering his previous high was around 115 innings for a season, and considering he's coming off TJ, it's hard for me to see him log too many innings this year in the bigs as a starter. But maybe they are planning on it.

Baez - Best case I see is late 2014. That would require him to rake in A+ this year (2013), hit AA next year and absolutely dominate. It's just tough to buy that right now, IMO, considering his tendencies. Thus, I think mid-late 2015 might be more realistic. Soler - Really no clue. My hunch is that he might follow a Rizzo-like path and needing time to adjust when he gets to the smarter pitchers in the upper levels. I'll go 2016, which IMO, is still positive (has him dominating in A ball ranks this year, hitting AA at some point in 2014). Almora - Like Soler, really just too far off to get an accurate gauge. I would guess the hope is roughly late 2015/2016 as well. Vizcaino - If they keep him as a starter and he shows well, I think he starts in the minors on an innings limits early. As the innings start to run out, I could see them move him to the pen and perhaps call him up for a cup of tea in 2013. Then the hope would be that he has built up enough innings to be a full-season (albeit, perhaps limited) starter in 2014. All this assumes a lot goes well ... and it's just as possible that a lot goes ... wrong.

Nice move for the Nationals. I'd trade a good low level pitching prospect to have Span at 2/12 with an option for 3/21. ...if we were planning on competing in the next few years. I'm taking the seemingly complete lack of interest in Upton and Span as a sign the front office might be more hopeful in Brett Jackson's future than I had assumed. Honestly, and I still like Brett enough, I'm taking it as they weren't going to spend the dough on a guy when they likely won't compete for the playoffs in a the next year or two and that they weren't going to give up a high quality arm for a stopgap CF, which I agree with.

Honestly, I feel like this is a nice move for both sides. Washington gets a good defensive CF and a top of the order hitter for a young, far away arm. It gives them the flexibility to not overpay LaRoche (or to over-pay him and deal Morse). Twins badly need an infusion of young talent, and Meyer is a good gamble. I know a lot of people think he's risky, and I do too, but he's a good, high upside arm, and for Span ... I like it.

I love Vizacaino (was largely derided on another site a few years back for preferring him to Teheran) ... but the injury history (first tore the ligament in 2010, IIRC), plus coming off TJ ... it's a bit of a concern. But ... if one feels comfortable enough about his health history (based off the assumption that TJ cleared up any significant issues that might have lingered), then okay, I can buy him at 2.

I'm still not sure why Soler is ahead of Baez on pure offensive upside. Bat speed and power potential for Baez is off the charts. _____ Anyhow, my arguments for the top 3, depending on how fast you guys move - 1. Javier Baez - Can I buy an argument for Almora? Yes. Arguably a safer prospect in some respects. But Baez has a far higher offensive ceiling and he showed better than expected ability at short. I mean, Baez's offensive ceiling is ridiculous if it he reaches it. Legitimate elite middle of the order type bat. Does he have flaws, offensively and defensively? Defensively, he might outgrow short in time, but until then, his ability at short is a plus over the other two. Offensively, he's aggressive to say the least. That said, when you add in that he produced in full-season and Almora hasn't gotten there yet, I would have Baez, on a Sickels scale, as a A-, with Almora more of a B+, and I think at his young age, you can hope that he improves his deficiencies. 2. Albert Almora - You know, it was a toss-up for me for awhile, but with the reports trickling out about holes in Soler's swings, the fact that Almora plays CF and has good offensive upside got the nod. Soler got the third spot. I'm not sure, in my mind, that anyone is close to Soler. Vizcaino's injury history makes it tough, Vogelbach's position makes it tough, Brett's K's ... go on down the line. I think that's the cutoff on the top tier.

Well, looks like Sickels has his final list of Cubs prospects. It's a solid list. Some disagreements on the tail end, but that always occurs. http://www.minorleagueball.com/2012/11/28/3702172/chicago-cubs-preliminary-prospect-list#comments

In case people aren't aware of it, Sickels is gearing up to do his prospect list for us. He has his long list out, and is looking for suggestions on adjustments (I was mildly surprised by some names that made it onto the initial list - in the comments section, he's put an updated list out, trimming 6 ... a couple surprising trims, IMO). Keep in mind that after the top few, he's always noted that the rest of the list is a jumble in some respects, and sometimes he prefers to talk about certain guys for certain reasons (last year, Jay Jackson made it ahead of Alberto Cabrera, as he was adamantly against Cabrera and thought Jay was a nice "tale" to tell because he was so hyped in 08/09 ... this year, sounds like Dunston's name (legacy) and Shoulders name (coolness) will make it on)).

The only thing I have wondered is what exactly Theo sold Tom on. Did Ricketts know that the rebuild was going to take this long? Here was the new owner that proclaimed Year 1, and it might be 5-6 years into his ownership before we hit the playoff. I actually don't have a gigantic problem with any of this (other than the Ryan Flaherty move, with the subsequent Jeff Bianchi signing, I haven't had any problems with any move individually ... and they lucked into Luis Valbuena, which adequately replaced Flaherty). It sucks, but building the right way isn't a bad thing. We had to get better assets into the farm, with higher ceilings. We had to rebuild our arm depth, which had thinned out until the 2008 class made it look like it might be on the upswing again, but only to see many of those arms falter. But ... it's a tricky thing. Anthoupoulos has collected tons of assets in Toronto, and his club still can't get over the hump. Baltimore hit the playoffs the year after MacPhail walked away and the year after it seemed like all their prized arms had regressed/gotten hurt.

Not in November 2012, no. When at least 4 of the starting rotation spots are already taken? At the very least, Shark and Vizcaino should be above Wood. The front office is also showing they can pick up decent pitching on one year deals in most offseasons, too. You're missing the point. I'm not saying, gee I wonder what the 2014 roster will look like, it's that we're not building toward anything. If the 2014 rotation is Shark, Wood and one year flotsam we aren't going to try to compete until 2015 which is ridiculous. I get your point, but the hope is that you add one or two solid upper level arms with midseason moves, hope Arodys can be a starter, and then have Samardzija/Vizcaino/1 trade acquistion/FA as the core of your 2014 rotation, and some competition to fill out the back end (hence why I'm not too concerned about the rotation). That said, I've said for awhile that 2015 looks like the first real "push" year (and that's if all goes well), because it's hard to imagine too many "core" pieces being added to Castro/Rizzo in 2013 to really believe we can push in 2015. It sucks, but once they went down the path of the full rebuild, the "grand experiment" of building the right way (and righting their errors in Boston), this was basically the way it was going to be.

I'm not concerned about our 2014 rotation as of now because I still have my doubts any of the current 5 (Garza/Samardzija/Wood/Baker/Feldman) are in the Cubs rotation in 2014. I guess the chance is high one or two of them (namely, Samardzija/Wood) are, but I'm not convinced that any will definitely be there.

SCS - What I mean by more enjoyable is that, with Keppinger, we could have a solid top of the lineup (DeJesus/Keppinger followed by Rizzo/Castro/Soriano in some fashion. I've been harping on the fact that I really don't like Barney up at the top of a lineup. Look, Keppinger doesn't change the equation on the team ... but he doesn't hurt it either. 3/10, if that is the case, seems like a moveable contract at midseason. At worst, you get an expensive utility player for a couple seasons. That's livable, considering the room we have. (and I have my doubts that it's going to take 3 years to land him ... I'm thinking 2 and an option). This doesn't remove a few key points - a) the Cubs only have two options to really turn to - Ian Stewart and Luis Valbuena, and both have their clear faults. And ... Stewart isn't that much cheaper than Keppinger. b) the only thing the Cubs lose is short term money ... and they have a lot of short term space available, with the chances of landing a really big fish (or even going after one), very slim. If you are talking a Zack Greinke type contract, fine, I can understand that. But this? Even if it's a marginal upgrade, it's still worth it, IMO, to build a slightly better supporting cast for Castro/Rizzo's development. Furthermore, IIRC, Keppinger has been noted for being a good influence, and this locker room certainly could use some veteran ... if not leadership ... advice. Edit: Another tiny marginal benefit? Getting improved defensive play at 3rd, which could help in our ability to trade some arms at mid-season.

Would? The Cubs were 71-91 two years ago and 75-87 before then. We've already seen two horrendous seasons in a row. Okay, fair enough ... what I should've said would be that two 100+ loss seasons would be hard to stomach, as it'd likely take a 100 loss season to have a shot at Rodon.

Brooks Raley probably fits in somewhere. Wouldn't surprise me if Loux was in AA. I think Bowden will end up being in a pen somewhere, AAA or the bigs, and I wonder if Alberto Cabrera ends up staying in the pen, despite stretching him out. Whitenack getting a 40 man spot probably means that if he gets off to a strong start, he could fit in the picture somewhere in terms of that depth/swing/Iowa (and I'd add emergency) list. And TT is right, as of now, Coleman deserves to be listed.

That's an awesome response from Brandon McCarthy. I like it. Feldman should be a decent rotation candidate. They've got a full-rotation now, but I imagine they'll probably add another piece (or two), giving them the option of shopping a guy, putting someone in the pen, or starting Wood in AAA if they feel he needs more work. With Baker/Feldman, you simply hope that one of them pitches well enough that they can shop them at mid-season. Hopefully both, but at least one.

I don't have a problem with it, depending on the terms of the deal. Hes a decent hitter and it wasn't his only good season. He adds depth and versatility. He's a better Jeff Baker. My problem isn't with the Keppinger part so much as the aggressively pursuing part. We have Stewart, Vitters, Watkins, Valbuena, and Lake as options to round out the infield. If we we're a few pieces away from contention, then I'd understand paying a bit more for a veteran utility guy or backup plan for 3rd. In the current state of this team, I don't get why they wouldn't rather autition what they have. The exception would be if they have a fish on the line that's willing to overpay for Barney. I don't see the problem with a Keppinger addition. I have my doubts we land him, but maybe we can offer a better shot at everyday PT (Chris Johnson hit well enough down the stretch for Arizona). Here's the thing. Vitters/Lake aren't ready. Watkins shouldn't be at 3rd. That leaves last year's two options, but Stewart struggled and seems to be on the outs with the club. Valbuena is more of a utility or platoon type. While it's not that important, I think there still is some significance to providing some positive atmosphere/experience for our prime youngsters, Castro/Rizzo, and adding Keppinger can help in the short term. Furthermore, Keppinger is the type of guy that you could move at the deadline, if one of the above is ready for a look (or Villanueva). Look, we have money to spend. Much as I am not against tanking 2013 to try and get Rodon (assuming Rodon stays ... awesome), I'm not for it either. Two horrendous seasons in a row would really suck. Keppinger doesn't mean that we really give up our shot at a high pick in 2014, but it could make the season a bit more enjoyable at the start, give them some flexibility, offer them a mid-season trade asset, and the cost is what? Money that we have to burn? Don't see a problem with it.

This is funny because of the type of hitter Deer was, but I really don't know much about him as a coach. Perhaps having such flaws allows him to be a good coach.

Purely on offensive upside, I think Javier Baez is number 1 for me. The bat speed and power potential is just top notch. I haven't really pondered a list after that. On offensive upside, I might ponder Vogelbach 2nd. If not Dan, then Jorge. Let's see, I'd probably go Almora/Candelario after that. Hmm ... I'm not sure I buy Golden as 5th on that list for offensive upside. On power, sure, he's up there in this system, but in terms of offensive ceiling, does he really match up with Marco Hernandez's bat speed/average power/speed combination? Or heck, even Brett Jackson, who might be a decent comp of a scenario for Reggie Golden's development? Just because Brett is more known doesn't mean that his ceiling is necessarily lower than Reggie's. Gioskar Amaya is somewhere in that mix as well. But that's me.

I know I've been pushing the idea that Samardzija should be shopped, but I don't think he should be dealt for an Alex Gordon-type bat. If anything, if you shop Samardzija, I think the focus should be getting a high ceiling upper level arm (and obviously, more), someone that fits more in line with the Cubs timeline. It's a risk, but with the direction of the club, I think that's the risk you have to take, rather than going after an established bat.

With Russell getting more expensive, and with Beliveau/Rusin/Raley being unknowns as effective lefty pen arms (if they are in the pen), I think I'm hoping for Lara there and seeing if a move full-time to the pen would help, particularly with his command. Adding a power lefty pen arm to the mix would be nice.

I'll be honest, I haven't seen any names that really intrigue me. Gotta wait to see a bigger, more complete list, though. There's got to be some mildly intriguing guys. Wwith such a high Rule 5 pick, you'd imagine that they would clear some space to grab a guy. But ... it's hard to imagine a guy like a Marc Krauss sticking a full year as a backup corner slugger. He's the type that needs AB's to remain consistent. If we didn't have so many lefties on the 40 already, I'd be intrigued with Lobstein, but hard to see where he fits. Josh Fields does catch some attention, and I'm sure the FO is probably looking hard at the available guys in the Red Sox/Padres organizations (that said, seeing preliminary lists for both teams, didn't seem to be anyone that enticing). ______ As for our available guys - The guy I'm most concerned with and really don't want to lose would be Starling Peralta. I could really see a team Lendy Castillo'ing him. I'd like Rosario back, but he still profiles more for the pen and I'm just not as concerned, as it's hard to buy a team picking him coming off injury. Struck would be a nice guy to have back, but if we lose him, okay. The other guys available, sure, it'd be nice to have them back, but if we lose them, eh. Carreno is basically a a less developed version of Struck (and his secondaries aren't as good). I think it wouldn't surprise me if none of our guys were picked, but it also wouldn't surprise me if we lost multiple guys. Guys like Hatley/Jay Jackson could be middle relief options, and Rosscup/Burke types could fill LOOGY roles, the types of guys that often get picked in Rule 5 these days.

Didn't they keep some guys through the Rule 5 drop date last year and cut them a few days later to open up some spaces? The main thing is protecting the guys they wanted to keep. I'm hoping a couple of the arms make it through Rule 5 and are still in our system next year. Won't be ... hurt ... if we lose some guys, but still. We have a lot of arms that fit the profile of guys that get taken in Rule 5.

I'm not sure why it's a surprise that LaHair couldn't be moved. He really just couldn't do much offensively. At his age, there are just too many other guys with similar profiles. Japan makes sense for him. He gets to make some dough and play on a regular basis. Whoa, we got Barret Loux for Jacob Brigham? Completely missed that. Pretty good, IMO.

I'm really not that surprised by the Whitenack addition. I think they probably viewed this year as a mulligan, of sorts, for him. I really talked about Struck a lot last year, but he is what he is, a nice young live arm, but more of a 4/5 starter, and in the pen, it's debatable if he has late inning potential (although you never know). Hoping that a couple of the raw arms make it through Rule 5.

Houston yes, but why Miami? They traded for Zack Cox last summer. It seems likely they'd give him a chance, and you really wouldn't spend a pick on Villanueva to fill a utility role (and they also have Marwin to fill a utility role). I'm also not completely sold on this idea that Clevenger gets dropped. They need a 3rd catcher on the 40. That said, they did cut Flaherty to replace him with Bianchi last year, so I guess maybe the idea is that they open a space up and fill the 3rd catcher spot later. Going to be interesting to see what they decide. Wouldn't surprise me if a guy like Nick Struck was left exposed. Looking at our roster, I'd trim some of those pitchers off. I honestly don't think anyone of Lendy Castillo/Jaye Chapman/Casey Coleman/Gerardo Concepcion/Carlos Gutierrez/Zach Putnam/Jake Brigham would be losses that I'd be bothered by. That said, realistically, Concepcion probably isn't going anywhere. Still ... I really couldn't see him staying long enough in the bigs next year. I think at least one or two of those could get chopped, if not 3, and that opens up space for arms like Struck/McNutt. Positionally, I wouldn't be surprised if one of Valbuena/Stewart were chopped. If they feel wary about their chances of finding a 3rd baseman, Stewart probably is saved. Valbuena could be cut loss to give Watkins a spot ... but that would leave three of your top MI 40 backup options, Lake/Vitters/Watkins as guys that should start the year in the minors. OF wise, LaHair can go. I could see Campana get knocked off the 40 as well.