toonsterwu

Maybe I'm just a bit bored right now with a few minutes to kill, and maybe I'm a bit brain-dead after lunch (chicken salad and soup), but I don't see why that trade should be [expletive] on, other than that it's another mock trade scenario (and the fact that, a, SCS posted it, and b, SCS basically asked people to [expletive] on it).. It doesn't look that bad on the surface (how each team individually values players, that's something we don't know). I'm not sure either team does it, but on the surface, doesn't look that bad. I really don't see the A's moving Reddick or Cespedes unless it's a really, really good deal. Is this good enough for them? I'm not sure, but a) Barney could slide in at 2nd. I guess it's possible they move him to short, but it wouldn't surprise me if they kept Stephen Drew. With their emphasis on defense, and the fact that their offense ... sucks, this is a landing spot for Barney, if we moved him, that makes sense and the team has a need. b) The A's have always valued trading for power bats, as it's hard for them to get the guys in FA. Is Vogelbach someone they like? Don't know, but makes sense. c) The A's don't really need Marmol, but if the Cubs eat enough, they could shop him, or shop another pen arm. d) Jackson/Szczur/Lake - I don't see any way they'd take Lake, unless it's to transition him to pitching. But getting another upper level OF makes sense for them if they think that they might move on from another veteran OF in a year or two (and maybe they think they can fix Jackson's swing). e) Alcantara/Amaya/Villanueva/Hernandez/Candelario - I really can't see the A's taking a huge interest in Hernandez, with Addison Russell on a similar level. Alcantara/Villanueva make some sense - the former a couple levels higher than Russell, the latter an upper level 3rd baseman. The upside of Candelario/Amaya could be intriguing for them. f) The Throw-in doesn't matter, but I doubt they'd take Hayden on. So, there's plenty of reasons for the A's to consider that. I think it's fair to question if the potential impact of the trade, the Vogelbach's and part e, is enough for the A's to make this deal, but there's a lot for them to like. Does it make sense for the Cubs? On the surface, it seems like a lot to give up, but trading for someone like Reddick is going to be costly. We do know that our FO likes him (IIRC, they held off on trading him for many years in Boston, as teams did call about him). He would add a good, young corner OF to the mix, someone with some pop. Dealing Vogelbach/part d/part e would be a lot, but we'd presumably have one upper level CF option around, and the part e guys are far away. Krol's a very nice lefty arm that would start in AA, giving us needed pitching depth, and Taylor is a decent upper level OF prospect to add to the mix (not really potential starting material, and might not even make it as a 4th OF type with his lack of pop, but a decent prospect with some ability). I don't know how I'd feel about it (I think I'd probably lean slightly to the no side), and again, I doubt either team would do this, but it doesn't look bad on the surface. And wow, I just wasted time assessing this ... As for giving up Baez (in a package) if we could get Anderson/Reddick ... yeah, that's the type of deal you'd consider moving Baez in (presuming the package isn't insane, I guess). That said, it's a tough situation to deal Brett his offseason for the A's - he logged limited innings, and next year is his final year before 2 option years at a relatively high price. I am a fan of Anderson, always have been, but it's hard to see the A's netting a really good package for him this winter. That said, if a team came calling with a good package, gotta think Beane would at least consider it.

I would, probably for either him or Cespedes. Whats an equivalent though? Jackson, Villanueva, Barney, and Candelario? Obviously, the Nats sent a pitching heavy package, but I'd think the value is close to the same. I don't know about that. We have to take some things into consideration such as a) Pitching prospects tend to get ... over-protected a bit. b) Brad Peacock and AJ Cole were coming off excellent seasons last year. Things have changed a year later, as both Peacock and Cole had their ups and downs. c) Norris was a very good catching prospect. It's really hard to draw any parallels between trades, as they exist in their own environment, but I'd probably value the Gio package more than Jackson/Villanueva/Barney/Candelario grouping. Leaving aside the fact that I doubt they'd pursue Jackson if they dealt an OF (not impossible, I guess), does that package make that much sense for the A's? I could see them have interest in Barney, though. In saying all that, I'm not exactly sold that a package similar to the Nats Gio deal is needed in a hypoethetical trade. That said, I also think that, at the end, they'll just shop Coco. _______ As for this deal, I find it fascinating on several levels. Obviously, the Fish were going to move on from Heath Bell, and getting an intriguing, albeit really questionable, prospect in Yordy Cabrera was a nice move. The A's send a struggling prospect with clear holes and a dime-a-dozen MI for Chris Young. Much as I have never been big on Young, that, on paper, is a good move. The Dbacks side is probably the one that I'm most lukewarm on, but even then, getting Heath Bell at a much lower rate and a decent MI seems like a decent move to clear a loaded OF and save them some money.

Nah, I have him. More a 25-40 guy in this initial run through.

Thanks, although reading through that, there were a lot of writing errors in there. I feel like I keep forgetting someone, but I'm not sure who (and maybe the person wouldn't fit in a top 20 or 30, but I just keep looking at the pool of names and I feel like someone's missing). It'd either be someone that was injured this year or an international signing from the last couple years (but I checked the international signings and couldn't come up with anyone).

Kyle's list motivated me to give my first run-through in months. Just top 20 for now. I did my usual pool of names and worked through it, but I feel like I’m forgetting someone. I wrote/typed notes along the way of why I had guys in certain places, but posting that would make this into another of my really long posts (not that it already isn't). But, while acknowledging that it is a run-through, I do have arguments for why I have guys in certain places and I’ll put a couple comments in there for now. I tossed grades on there, though I don't really love it, as a way to show the gap in my mind in thinking about guys. I still stick with what I said earlier in the year – I’m not sure that 2nd tier of the system, for me, is all that strong. That would roughly be 4-7 for me, the B type prospects (if I wanted to make larger tiers, I would go 1-3, 4-7, 8-15). The depth of the system, IMO, is from 11 to maybe 30, where there’s a boatload of guys. I mean, heck, you could work into a top 50 of the Cubs system and expect to see guys on the back end that you could easily buy as getting major league time at some point in there career (for example, Marcus Hatley). The exciting thing is that it doesn’t take much imagination to believe that we could have 5 or more guys from 11-30 really emerge in the next year and bulk up that 2nd tier. With the really top talent, it was easy to decide things, but I cut it off at 20 for now, because after that, we get into the murky area of intriguing young guys (mostly arms, and a lot of them, that’s for sure, wanted to take a moment to note that AMG has sort of been lost in the discussion, and I thought he was a fascinating arm that almost no one mention. Ryan McNeil probably deserves a touch more hype … not sure there’s a gap between Blackburn and McNeil in my mind right now.) and low ceiling productive higher level guys (the most noticeable ones to me would be Nick Struck and Logan Watkins). I still tend to give some general upper level benefit of the doubt if the guys are really far away (Arizona), but that’s just how I am. I’m also wary of slotting pen arms high (for example, just because Kyle noted him, I’m not sure where Tony Zych fits in for me. Playing it out after 20, I’m not sure he’s in my top 25, and I’m not certain he’s in my top 30). I could go any number of ways from 16-20. I’ve always had some bias for Ben Wells as a personal favorite, so I can understand people sliding him down some more on health concerns. I can understand the same feelings for Whitenack, but I heard positive enough things on fastball action/velocity this summer that I’ll give him a tiny upper level/hope 2nd year back from TJ is better bump. Vitters/Ha were tough decisions. I have never been big on either one of them in recent years, but man … Vitters is still young and showed some improvement, while Ha plays a tough position well (or better) and had a nice 2nd half. I can see the arguments for the Rosario’s of the world (admittedly, the injury concerns hurt him in this run-through in my head), and I know that I love the ceiling of Underwood (I am intrigued with a lot of our young arms but he, along with Maples, feels like some of the few guys with truly high level potential). I really wanted to squeeze in personal favorite Stephen Bruno, but as I’ve noted before, he, like another Cubs MI for me, is a “prove it at each level” guy, even if that’s a bit unfair to either guy. I’ll probably give this another run through and push it to 30 or more. ________ The Top Tier 1. Javier Baez, A-. 2. Albert Almora, B+. 3. Jorge Soler, B+. __________ Intriguing but with questions 4. Arodys Vizcaino, B. 5. Brett Jackson, B/B-. I can understand why people would put him lower. Much as I like him, this was a horrific season. Leaving aside the major league trial, there were still extended stretches in AAA where he was striking out close to 50% of the time. That’s just bad. Still … he has power, plays a solid CF. That should be enough for him to get looks in the majors. He doesn’t need to hit for a high average to have a shot, but can he hit for a passable average? I don’t know. I think he can improve, but then again, I didn't expect such a horrific year. The reason I keep him here, though, is that a lot of the top guys after this are in the low levels and a few years away, so for me, I think there’s enough risk in how far away they are that I'll keep Brett here in this run-through. But that's me. 6. Juan Carlos Paniagua, B/B-. ___________ A tiny separation, but separation did exist in my mind. 7. Pierce Johnson, B-/B. (I really may ponder sliding this up with the above mini-group) Polished college arm with a plus fastball, good breaking ball, and decent changeup, IIRC. That said … how high is this ceiling? That’s what pushes him slightly down for me. I can see a case of lumping him in with the above guys, but I really want to get a better picture of how good the quality of that breaking ball is, and we really won’t know until we see him against tougher competition. Going to be curious what the Cubs do with him. I could see them starting him in Daytona if he has a lights out spring, but that would make for a jammed rotation situation. 8. Arismendy Alcantara, B-. I’ve said before that, on gut feeling, I’m still very wary of Alcantara, and I stand firm on that point. But leave aside gut feeling for a moment. Here’s a toolsy shortstop, who will only be 21 next season (22 after the season). He has to become more consistent defensively, but the tools are there to be a plus shortstop. He doesn’t strike out THAT much, but he certainly could work on improving his approach. He showed some pop this year and had a breakthrough offensive season before getting hurt. It’s hard not to be intrigued with that package. He’s in a tough spot … he has to keep pushing forward with Baez nipping on his heels. He should start in Tennessee. 9. Dan Vogelbach, B-. Alcantara's tools, position, and level was enough to push him ahead of a pure first baseman. 10. Christian Villanueva, B-. __________ Another gap 11. Matt Szczur, C+. So, this is the way I look at Szczur. First, at a certain point, I agree that being young to baseball doesn’t matter, as your age is ... your age. At this juncture, it’s safe to say that it really shouldn’t be a mini-plus for him anymore, which I think it was for some the last couple years. I also understand and have noted before that Keith Law’s concerns were always fair – Szczur has swing work to do if he wants to maximize his power potential. I think it improved this year, but there’s work. That said, what is he? A plus defensive centerfield option, solid on the basepaths. He’s improved his approach at the plate (I was very troubled with Szczur's approach last offseason as the trends in Peoria, month to month, were headed in the wrong direction). Can he make more contact against tougher pitching? I tend to think he’ll improve on that front next year, but that’s a gut feeling, and if one feels he was exposed this year, okay, slide him down. But ... if he can, then his ability to hit some gap shots, plus an improved approach, could give him a chance to be a top of the order bat. It’s enough for me to stick with him here. 12. Marco Hernandez, C+. 13. Jeimer Candelario, C+. Grade feels low ... but I really couldn't push him higher for now. I'll ponder. 14. Ronald Torreyes, C+. 15. Gioskar Amaya, C+. I almost think he’s a bit … under-hyped. I know there were moments where I sounded negative on him, but I really like Amaya. I feel like his power ceiling moved up a tiny notch this year, and he sounds like he handled 2nd relatively well. Here’s a potential top of the lineup type hitter that has some pop in his bat, and if he plays a decent 2nd, that’s a very intriguing and good asset. ___________ Gap (If I pondered this section some more, I feel like I might eventually slide some arms past Ha/Whitenack, but I just couldn't do it for now. 16. Ben Wells, C+. 17. Josh Vitters, C+. This almost feels a tad unfair to a guy who is still so young. 18. Jae-Hoon Ha, C+. 19. Robert Whitenack, C+. 20. Starling Peralta, C+. Giving him a tiny edge on Underwood here, as his ceiling is awfully good (potentially 2 plus pitches if he becomes more consistent) and he’s at a higher level, but Underwood was the main guy competing in my mind.

Total side note, but you could add one more to get to 25 ... you only have 24 guys (you skipped 17 in your numbering).

I'd be more inclined to wait out the pitching market than giving up talent, unless the price is surprisingly cheap.

I'd love to get Price, but that isn't happening. There's no way they are about to make that move without enough of a core to make a push in the next year or two, and without enough of a system to support it. I just don't see it. I'd love to be proven wrong ... that said, dreams are great. As for Shields, I think he might draw a decent return on the trade market. I wonder how they play it - wait for the top arms to sign, or shop him early? I don't really think the trade market can be compared to the Garza trade, due to years left and the fact that it happened in-season. I can't really think of a good recent trade to ponder a comp for it (the best that comes to mind is the Ubaldo trade, but that happened in season ... and that was two top prospects (Pomeranz/White) with 2 decent-solid guys) ... but since the recent posts compared it to the Garza trade, I guess I'll work with that. If the Garza trade was 2 top prospects, 2 decent-solid guys (and IIRC, Chirinos was a big part of the deal because they were specifically targeting a catcher prospect to develop), and 1 filler (Fuld), I imagine they could probably get at least 1 top prospect, and 1 guy maybe a tick below that, but better than the Chirinos/Guyer types, to build a Shields trade around. There'd be other parts to mix and match, but considering the value of top pitching, I'd be surprised if they couldn't get 1 top prospect and at least another very good prospect to build around. I'm not sure what they would need, but with Chirinos as a big unknown, I'd imagine they'd like a C prospect in return, and off the top, maybe a power hitting young OF? ______ As to what I'd "want for Christmas for the Cubs", it'd be a solid veteran arm on a 2 year deal, and wishing said arm, along with Garza and Shark, get off to good starts in 2013, giving us the flexibility to move them ... any of them ... if the right trade came along.

My guess is DeJesus is with us to start 2013 ... but it wouldn't really stun me if a team came calling and offered a decent deal for a capable top of the order type hitter like DeJesus, with the thinking that it would be safer than spending multiple years on a weak FA. For example ... the Orioles have the returning Reimold, who is 29 and has been banged up quite a bit, and McLouth as a FA. They did well with Markakis as a leadoff option this year, but if McLouth gets too pricey ... I wonder if they might consider it. I guess, I'm thinking in my head that DeJesus might look like a nice option to some of the FA's out there. Hard to know how the trade market will shape up, though ... and hard to know if the Cubs would move DeJesus on a simply decent deal, or if they value his value to the team next year, as a veteran who can get on base, such that they would hope for something more than decent (and obviously, using the word decent without expanding on it makes it hard to really make a judgment on anything I've said here ... so taking a specific example ... what if they got a Baker-type deal this offseason, getting a Carreno type arm in return? I wonder if they would do it ... I'd certainly consider it)

I don't know about highway robbery (in that, teams at the deadline often over-value guys, and often times, over-value versatile guys with some pop (although I really haven't gone through trades to see if that's true, just feels that way), and it's not like Carreno is an elite arm), but yes ... getting cash (I believe that was the other component of the deal) and a semi-intriguing SP prospect for Baker, a guy who really didn't fit into our near future, is a dang good move. AzPhil suggested him as a possible SP at Daytona to start 2013. It'll be interesting what happens. He clearly should move to A+ ... but we also have Wells, Rosario, Jensen, and Peralta all lined up for a possible bump to Daytona, and maybe Paniagua as well. Add in that Francescon/Burke/Del Valle/Hendricks aren't exactly locks to go to AA (although ... Francescon/Burke are old enough that if they (in this case, namely Burke because of his status) are around, they could be in a tight spot next year ... and both could be shifted to pen duty; Del Valle probably should move up, but after the odd, odd year of Antigua, which admittedly, probably has as much to do with velo as anything, I'm a little hesitant to guess on Del Valle, particularly since he was moved around a bit in his role; Hendricks isn't important enough to block anyone, in all honesty). But the other five guys are all intriguing to various degrees. If Paniagua is ready for A+, then he likely gets a SP nod. If Well is healthy, I'll be surprised if he doesn't get one. Obviously, if those two if's don't happen ... problem solved. Peralta has done two tours of Peoria, so he should probably go to Daytona, and Rosario was solid. I don't know if Jensen makes it as a starter, but he was good enough last year that it would seem to make sense to keep him there for now (I guess ... it's crossed my mind if Jensen could look good enough in spring to go to AA). That said, a long way until spring, and things could change at that point. For now, it's a heck of a deal to get a solid return on Baker. The BA reports on Carreno sure sound positive enough on his secondary pitches to hope for some development.

I wouldn't be surprised if he pitched in another major league game. I might be a tad surprised if he started one, considering his age and the lack of plus stuff would, in my mind, make it likely that a team would give a youngster a look, but I guess I wouldn't be shocked. That said, who knows. No one really saw Wells coming through with two solid years, and maybe he has a surprising year in the near future/

I think I'd still prioritize trying to get a veteran on a 2 year deal, say someone like Marcum, than Haren, but if the Angels pay enough, it'd be a nice idea. A good year and you could easily flip him at the deadline. A bad year and you just walk away from a gamble. I'd be curious on an Ervin Santana gamble if they paid enough. That said, there's a part of me that wonders that if they may simply prefer cutting the cord on those two guys and paying the 4.5 million combined buyout (1 mil for Santana, 3.5 mil on Haren) than eating a bit more money and getting average prospects in return. I just wonder if they may think that having the extra money to spend is more important in trying to get Greinke signed and perhaps adding pen help.

89-91 would be okay if could tighten up the breaking ball. I'm still mighty curious how he was throwing a bit harder last year than this year, but w/e. Admittedly, after waiting 2 years for the breaking ball to tighten and improve, I'm not really holding out that much hope for it to improve significantly in the near future.

I'm mighty curious about velo reports on Struck and Rhee, particularly in their short stints, in AFL. Struck's going to stay a starter in the system, partly due to the lack of talent (but he does have 2 capable pitches, usable 3rd, enough command), but I do wonder if his future is in the pen, where he can come out blasting with the fastball and throwing strikes. If Rhee can ramp up the fastball and the split-change is sharp, he could be one of the better pen options in the system. * Completely random thought, but watching Miguel Gonzalez last night, I kept thinking ... damn, if Rhee could only improve his breaking balls enough. I mean, they are fairly similar in profile with their two main pitches, plus split-change, average fastball.

I've always been somewhat partial to Toronto as well, having spent some time up there (although Baltimore/Washington are my secondary teams, having lived in that area for a large chunk of my life). I'm sure there are year-to-year answers that could be studied, but in general, to the best of my recollection right now, after Tim Wilken left, they had a stretch of mediocre drafts and several top guys never panned out (the one that stands out to me right now is Dustin McGowan. When you factor in the difficulty of the division, plus the difficulty in attracting top FA's to Toronto unless the price is right, it's a tough dynamic. They need to build from within. I believe Anthoupoulos has them headed in the right direction, but this year shows how difficult it can be to "build the right way". He's done a lot of smart moves, but injuries, coupled with struggles by players, made it tough, particularly in a year where Baltimore surged. Right now, on paper, they need a lot to be competitive on the major league level, and I tend to think their system might be a touch over-hyped. I haven't followed closely enough to know what went wrong with Ricky Romero, but they need arms to step up.

I can't say I'm terribly surprised that no Cubs prospect made it. The D-Cubs weren't a particularly strong team as it related to prospect talent this year. The top guys that probably qualified (as Baez didn't qualify, but also didn't have a great run in FSL), off the top, would've been Matt Szczur, Arismendy Alcantara, Ronald Torreyes on the hitting side. Torreyes struggled for part of the year, and Alcantara got hurt. Will be curious if they say/said anything on Szczur. After that, you're looking at guys like, what, Rubi Silva and John Andreoli. Not exactly guys that grab attention. On the pitching side, it's a lot of mid-end of the rotation arm types, with a couple soft-tossing lefties in Kirk and Del Valle (and Jokisch if he qualified), and a couple older righties in Loosen and Francescon without top stuff. Whitenack was rehabbing, and from a pen perspective, I'm not sure if Zych qualified, but he was gone so early and had problems with his breaking ball. The start of 2013 should be better in regards to the quality of names at Daytona (whether or not they perform, only time will tell). The SP staff could be better, with guys like Ben Wells, Starling Peralta, Jose Rosario, Michael Jensen likely all ticketed there (and IMO, all should still be in the rotation). I'm not sure where Zach Cates fits in, but he could be headed to Daytona again. Baez should be there to start 2013, and Soler could be as well.

I actually sorta agree with this. I'm of the boat that Villanueva has been a bit over-hyped. I'm still not sure he's significantly better than say, Arismendy Alcantara, but Alcantara got hurt and people forgot about his season. It's not that I buy Alcantara - still wary of the bat the upper levels ... just not sure Villanueva is this stud. Here's hoping though. Have people sold Villanueva as a stud? I haven't noticed anything close to that. My recollection at the trade time was that people were hard-selling Villanueva as a possible top 100 prospect. Stud was probably the wrong word choice above, but I'm just not sold that he's that intriguing.

Of that list, I'd be most intrigued with Derek Holland and Brett Anderson, with Casey Kelly, Jhoulys Chacin, and Wade Davis a tier behind. Have my doubts that the Rangers or A's would move Holland or Anderson unless it's a really quality package.

I'd still be a bit surprised if we could match up with the Diamondbacks. I'd also be surprised if they did a Gordon for Bauer type deal. Davidson seems close to ready and despite questions on his ability at the hot corner, probably gets a look there if he gets called up, and Gordon hasn't played 3rd in a long time. They need a shortstop bad.

I actually sorta agree with this. I'm of the boat that Villanueva has been a bit over-hyped. I'm still not sure he's significantly better than say, Arismendy Alcantara, but Alcantara got hurt and people forgot about his season. It's not that I buy Alcantara - still wary of the bat the upper levels ... just not sure Villanueva is this stud. Here's hoping though.

I really don't see what we would flip for Casey Kelly. Hard to see them have interest in an IF, as they have system depth in that regards. Just don't see a fit, as they have youth at C, 1st. They claim they will keep Headley, which forces Gyorko to another spot, otherwise Gyorko gets 3rd. Maybin's defense probably gives him time in CF, and what they need, if anything, might be corner OF bats ... but if they keep Quentin, that need is lessened (until he gets hurt ... ). I mean ... if we give up enough quality, sure, but then again ... there's a limit I'd go for Casey Kelly.

A lot depends on Castro. Say Castro stays as a quality defender. In that case, he probably earns the right to stay at short. My preference would be to have Baez at 3rd and move Villanueva to a corner OF role, but I can understand an argument for Baez at 2nd and Villanueva at 3rd. Here's the thing - if both pan out and Baez is moved off short to 3rd, I expect plenty of teams to call on Villanueva in that situation. The 3rd base market just seems dry for the next couple years. We could potentially get a nice piece or two if some team needed a 3rd baseman.

I hope my local teams, the Orioles and Nats, can advance. Realistically, though, I'm going to be stunned if the Orioles can beat the Rangers. You never know in one game, but I don't particularly trust Saunders against that lineup, and Johnson ... eh. Orioles are going to have to score and keep it close that their bullpen can make a difference.

Look, this season sucked, no doubt (that said, I thought it was fairly obvious in the spring that a 90-100 loss season was easily possible) ... and next season might suck as well. But ... the fact that the Cubs fans are giving the GM some leeway, IMO, has less to do with Theo and more to do with the aging core plus the fact that they committed to a full rebuild. Come 2014, I doubt Cubs fans will give Theo and this regime as much leeway. I think there's an expectancy of a struggling team in 2013, so I think they'll be some leeway next year. There were a lot of positives this year. Whether or not Anthony Rizzo will become a star, only time will tell, but he will probably be a solid starter for many years. They moved on from the Soto era with a cheaper option, and potentially better, in Castillo. The MI defense was stellar, and Castro is continuing to develop. Samardzija was given a shot to start, something not every regime would've done considering his history, and he took the ball and ran with it. Most importantly, the lower levels of the farm seem to be trending in the right direction. For a full rebuild job, that was the most important thing. Of course, what we need are more arms, and whether or not they succeed may depend on that fact, as much as any.

Thanks for all the insight you provided through the years. Here's hoping you still come around, particularly since you can still provide insight on Cubs prospects that you see on road trips. Nonetheless, best of luck with everything going forward.