toonsterwu

Worth what? What is being risked? Money that is otherwise not being spent? A modest payroll amount 4 years down the line? No long term assets are being sold off for temporary upgrades, or prospects being blocked for short term fixes. Well, I was looking at dew's scenario, which would've given a 4 year deal to BJ Upton, which is something I'm not keen on. My point in the afternoon was that, if you end up committing years and money to Garza, you sort of can't just sit back. It doesn't mean you dive in headfirst, and it doesn't mean you make foolish moves (and I put, nothing personal dew, BJ Upton and a 4 year deal in that category), but aggressively shopping for a better 3rd starter and adding a cheap veteran arm would be my priorities, rather than a gamble on a SP and a 4 year deal on BJ. I understand the rationale in pursuing BJ (young guy, in his prime, loads of tools, capable defensive centerfielder), I'm just not a fan of BJ and believe that, with what is in the upper levels of the system, if you sign Garza, then you keep pushing on the rotation.

Missed an interesting day, so some random thoughts, nothing new - - The "Where is Stephen Bruno?" game continues. CF? RF? He's athletically sound enough to play CF, and with experience, probably play it at a higher level. But ... he really shouldn't be groomed as a utility player until the chances of him developing into a starter is much slimmer. Moving him up to Peoria would move move him to short, a position he can handle. Timothy Saunders shouldn't block anyone if they are ready, nothing personal on Saunders. - Marco Hernandez has a 9 game hit streak. A better note is that, over the last 39 AB's, he's only had 5 K's. That jives with the reports that he's finding a groove and settling in, forcing himself to be more disciplined. Still wish he walked more, but baby steps (and yes, I know he had a bad stretch right before this so this is partially cherry-picking data, extend it 5 games, and the overall line for the stretch would be pretty bleh). - It's too early to get worried, but since we've spent so much time talking about the potential of guys "pressing" (Brett Jackson in the other thread, Baez above), I wonder if Matt Szczur is pressing. If not, then uh ... well ... 9 K's in 33 AB's ... not good (but granted, SSS). - Junior Lake is on another tear. One random side note, but I had not realized how much he has struggled with lefties this year. Seems ... odd. - Quietly murdering the ball ... Justin Bour. Last 10: .344/.432/.813. He got off to a hot start last year before cooling off, but he's been better this year and there seems to be some curiosity about him. The power's been solid this year. Doesn't have much of a future with us, though (uh ... do not want him in LF). - Quietly hitting well of late - Dong-Yub Kim. It seems so long ago when he was a fascinating new young guy that AzPhil was tracking. He's older now, though, so time is running short, but nice to see him doing something with the bat. Edit: Oh, another guy that it's good to see him hitting, for moreso than Bour or Kim, is Mark Malave. Granted, it's the DSL, so I never really take anything positive from there all that seriously ... but struggling in the DSL would be troublesome, so it's nice to see that he's turned the corner from his slow start.

Or ... he simply has to work on improving his approach at the plate. at the end of the day, struggling isn't a bad thing provided he has the work ethic, strength of mind, and, well, understanding, for lack of a better term, to get better. If he doesn't, well, then that would be a bigger issue. There's really no big negatives for the rest of this year in regards to Baez if he's mentally tough - if he succeeds, then people will be touting him as a possible top 10 prospect; if he falters, okay, be mentally tough and get to work in the fall.

Well, as intriguing as Alcantara is, the simple thing is that, like with Marco, if Baez is ready, everyone steps aside. That said, with Alcantara, they have the easy answer of bumping him to AA and shifting Lake to full-time 3rd or another spot (corner OF?). My hunch is that they might consider that. I wouldn't say that Alcantara is definitely deserving of a bump up, but he's done enough to warrant consideration of it. Like with Baez, and with Lake last year, you really need to see Alcantara against tougher pitching to get a good gauge on whether or not his approach can hold up enough to make him a solid offensive player.

My guess is that it would take some extreme circumstances for him to start anywhere but Daytona next year, but I think this signals that he could potentially spend a good amount of time in AA by the end of 2013. Agreed. I also hope Bruno is bumped up to Peoria. I want to see Bruno in Peoria, but I really have no idea how comfortable they would feel about giving him shortstop, which is the open position. Marco Hernandez is on a 9 game hit streak, but it seems quite unlikely that they would bump him up. Personally, I'd prefer Bruno up, but I could understand it if they thought, hey, we need some time to make a secondary move, and will stopgap it with Saunders/Darvill in the interim.

I think it was some sort of leg injury. I asked whoever runs the Daytona twitter feed if he would be back soon, but all they said was he was still in AZ rehabbing. I was wondering if the eventual move would be Alcantara to Tenessee when he returns and Junior Lake or Logan Watkins to Iowa when that happens. Alos, could they have just as easily given Tim Saunders a crack at AA? he was relly doing well for himself in his short stint at Daytona. Saunders seems more like a guy who will move around to fill in gaps in the system than a guy who is going to get pushed aggressively,

I have high doubts they will deal Villanueva. They were reportedly targeting young 3rd basemen in trades, so it was a position they wanted to address. Villanueva might not have been Plan A or B (or so forth), but they had to like him enough for him to be the centerpiece of the deal.

If we keep Garza, say on a 5/85 extension, and pick up Liriano on a 1 year deal with an option then we field this rotation: 1) Garza 2) Shark 3) Liriano 4) Wood 5) Raley? RF) DeJesus SS) Castro 1B) Rizzo LF) Soriano CF) Upton 2B) Barney 3B) Vitters/Stewart C) Castillo/Clevenger Here's the thing - is a potential, on-paper year run of respectability worth it? Because I'll be honest, that team you have up there, while it could be respectable, I could also see it be ... horrid. 100 loss horrid. Reasons why (just playing devil's advocate here, stuff in random order): 1. It's not hard to envision Upton's increasing aggressiveness continue, dragging down whatever offensive value he might have even further. 2. Not hard to imagine Soriano having a sharp decline. 3. Any lineup where Barney might be remotely considered a 6th hitter is just bad (granted, I would've put 3rd over Barney) 4. Liriano is a big health risk with an arm that could fall. 5. Wood's numbers are closer to last year than his 2010 campaign ... 6. Raley has fringe stuff Now, I know this is a mock scenario and that there are a lot of other ways to throw together things, but even your mock scenario to respectability is fraught with huge risks that could add in a burdensome contract on a player who, despite being in his prime age range, is trending the wrong way. There's been guys who somehow started falling earlier, age-wise, than expected. _____ There is, without a doubt, an argument to keeping Garza. Furthermore, there is, without a doubt, a legitimate point that, for lack of better analogy, you can't keep passing go and collecting 200, and at some point, you've got to take a chance. I just think that this is a year early to be making those moves. One more year from now, and you'll hopefully start having some solid prospects moving into the upper levels AND you'll have a lot more financial flexibility. With the way the draft is now, I just don't know if a risky on paper year of respectability is worth it. ___ Now, my loose thinking, as of 1:11 pm on 8/4/2012, is, if you extend Garza (and not just keep him and hope he doesn't get hurt to deal him at midseason), then I think you have to start trying to make more aggressive moves than Upton and gambling on an arm like Liriano's. I don't know if a justifiable upgrade in CF and 3rd base are out there that we can get. I'm just not convinced that BJ Upton is worth the years and money when you have a similar player in Brett Jackson, who is better defensively than given credit for (although not plus), so I really wouldn't pencil in BJ on anything unless you deal Brett in a package. But, I noted this somewhere, if the effort is to be respectable, and you keep Garza, I think you have to got out and try and get two rotation arms this winter, guys that can slot in as your 3/4 if possible. You don't go into the year with Travis Wood penciled in as anything more than an end of the rotation arm if you want to be respectable. If he's better than that, great, but his numbers are closer to last year's than 2010, which is what the optimistic hopes were. He's still young, but the point is, you don't depend on a lot from him. Get an innings eater on a short deal, akin to the Maholm situation, and try for a slightly bigger ticket item that comes with a bit less risk than Liriano. It might not be a top tier arm this offseason (Greinke/Sanchez), but a good, quality starter (since I'm having fun playing hypothetical GM right now, it could even be the trade market where you could perhaps try to see what the Rays would want to move James Shields, but that's probably shooting a bit high). Then, I think, much as I hate to sign pen arms, you try to sign one guy with some late inning potential to give yourself insurance. I like Alberto Cabrera a lot, but I don't know if I want him as my main backup option at closer (and this is assuming Marmol is here, which is debatable). In this mini-situation, you've set up a solid rotation with a solid pen. I run with the kids (Jackson in CF, Vitters at 3rd or LF). The lineup will be pretty ... rough around the edges, and the pitching staff could easily get frustrated. If you are clearly out of it at midseason (a high probability), you flip that 2nd FA arm (the short term veteran) in a trade. Then, after 2013, you have a better idea of what the kids can do, and in the winter of 2013, you can likely be more aggressive in the trade market, with a stronger system. ____ Anyhow, that's my random thoughts on a Saturday afternoon. I'll throw another one out because I'm having fun with scenarios today - if we want to talk about a CF upgrade ... there's a lot of speculation that the Red Sox might shop Ellsbury this offseason ... I don't think we fit in a direct swap, but it'd be an interesting idea to explore.

Since Hutchison is being talked about, I wanted to put my 2 cents in and say that, while I'm no fan of Hutchison, if Marcum can come over and do what he's done, I don't see why the expectations for Hutchison in a trade can't be similar to what Marcum's done (not saying it will, just saying expectations). Keep in mind that Marcum only had that one superb control year (2010 ... in 2008 and 2009, his walk rates were in the mid-upper 2's). When you factor in that Hutchison has better stuff, and yeah, I don't see why he couldn't potentially do what Marcum has done. Considering that Hutchison has a long track record of solid to plus command in the minors, it's reasonable, as of now, to expect that he'll bring the walk rate down a bit more. Again ... not a huge fan of Hutchison, just tossing out my 2 cents on this mini-discussion here.

On Upton - I think there has to be some legitimate concern on giving him a 4 year deal. Here's a guy whose defense has always been a touch overhyped. UZR has him as an average-ish defender for the last 3 years now. UZR certainly has it's flaws, but it's 3 years running of roughly similar numbers. Offensively, I haven't followed enough to know what his problems are this year (or what his bigger problems are), but he's becoming a far more ... aggressive player at the plate and the power has dipped this year. It could be an anomaly (although he's been steadily becoming more aggressive each year), but it's a bothersome piece of data. As horrible as Brett Jackson has been ... if BJ Upton isn't a plus defensive CF, and UZR would suggest he isn't, I'm not sure the difference from Brett to BJ is worth making a multi-year commitment to BJ Upton.

I can't think of anything else to say but ... fascinating. I'm mildly surprised they made the move now, but one could argue that, for Baez to improve his weaknesses, he had to face tougher guys. I don't recall Alcantara going down with a serious injury, but for the life of me, I can't think of what he went down with right now. Perhaps this means Alcantara is out for a longer period of time than expected. Letting Torreyes/Baez/Villanueva work together is also a small positive gained out of this. I wonder if Peoria will let Saunders/Darvill handle short, or if they might call up say, Stephen Bruno.

Oh ... that sucks. He's going to be protected.

Really more a side note, but considering what they were reportedly targeting for Dempster (starting with Lee, falling back to Webster with the Dodgers ... and then there were the failed Delgado example), I really wonder what they would've shot for had Garza been healthy. They kept talking about two prime young pieces, so I wonder what they had, in their minds, as a possible demand. I say this because of the comment above - I'm not so sure they would've taken Hutchison/Syndegaard and change for Garza. I have nothing to base it on, but it's just that ...with what they were demanding, initially, for Dempster, one would imagine the demands on Garza would be higher, and Hutchison/Syndegaard seems like a steep drop. _____ My stance on Garza is fairly simple, and it's loosely what TT wrote above. At some point, you need to keep guys, but ... at this stage in the rebuilding, if Garza isn't willing to sign for whatever they feel is appropriate, then yes, I think they should move him IF they get a good deal. At the end of the day, whether or not a deal will be decent can easily be judged by whether or not they feel that the package is better than gaining a compensatory pick (hard to see Garza taking a one year deal), so Theo/Jed will probably have an idea for what qualifies as good and they can work from there. You don't take a bad package, and you don't give Garza what he wants, but you also can't waste a resource at this critical juncture in the rebuilding process. It's a delicate balance, but they are paid to figure it out.

Honest question, what constitutes a wave for you? I guess, I really don't consider waves until they are on the tip of a full season team, and possibly on a "track" (that is, a group of arms that move from one level to the next, largely with each other). I should be more positive, but I don't know if I see a wave. I see some intriguing pieces here and there, but some of the Arizona crop is likely to be bumped to the Boise track right now (that is, potentially headed to Peoria to start next year). In the current Boise crop, the only really interesting guy, IMO, is Arias. There's some hope for guys like Scott/Pugliese, but there's really a big step down from the potential of Arias to their potential. There's around maybe, 10 guys in Arizona that intrigue me as potential starters, but some will jump to Peoria, some will be headed to Boise, and some will probably be held back (there was some mild hype for Brian Smith a year ago, but he's still in Arizona).

- To be clear, the above order is how I want things, but I think the Cubs will protect McNutt. - Cubs are going to have a lot of decisions on lefties. It's hard to imagine keeping more than 2 additional lefties, and I've got to think Raley gets a spot as of now. Kirk, Rusin, Rosscup, Burke ... I'd hate to lose them, but they are all guys that, if they were picked, you sort of wish them the best and move on. - Watkins will be interesting. What happens with Cardenas/Valbuena could impact the decision on Watkins. If they keep those two around on the 40, I could see them exposing Watkins. That said, a lot of the pro-Watkins people that were in the organization are reportedly still there, so yeah, I can definitely see him getting a nod as an upper level utility guy. He's been absolutely raking post-SL ASG, and he seems to have these summer months (I think it happened last year as well) where he's on such a roll, it makes you sort of wonder if he might be a passable 2nd tier club starter type of guy.

Gotta be Junior Lake. Yup, it's Junior Lake. As a total side note, reading my comment above before the cold medication kicks in (some generic brand, only think that can knock me out), I didn't mean that I didn't think Amaya couldn't stick at 2nd (it sort of reads that way). I just meant I don't think he'd ever be as good as Pedroia has been, defensively, at 2nd, and if Amaya's bat plays, it really wouldn't surprise me if he ended up in a corner OF spot.

phew, a 2nd hit for Marco. I'm not some weird offensive jinx on him. Of course, his 2 errors sort of negate the positives. .. but hey, it's the low minors. 90% of the time, all we care about are the offensive numbers, hoping that the defense will work out. ____ The frustrating thing about Marco and Brett Jackson's season, for me, is that there's been stretches where there's been big positives, or things haven't been that bad. In Brett's case, his K rate didn't sky out of control in April. Now, one could argue that the pitchers got a better book on him as the season went along, but the horrid K rate in June was just ridiculous. In Marco's case, and I still stand by how high I put him last year as it was a judgment on tools, for the last month or so, until this 10 day stretch, it was easy to forget that he had a solid May in Peoria (hittiing .316 in this stretch, with 1 AB to go today). The thing is ... almost all the positives came true for Marco. He looks like he could be a potential plus defensive shorstop. He's shown very good bat speed. He has good range, good running speed. He's shown some pop at times, more than I expected at this stage, to be honest. But ... he just hasn't shown that much discipline. The positive is that he's shown an awareness of his problems. His K rate came down in May in Peoria, and there's been indications that after being very aggressive at the start of the Boise season, he's showing a bit more patience at the plate, waiting on pitches.

I would never wish injury on anyone, but ... it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if Castro had to take a few weeks off in September and Barney was playing shortstop.

oh hey, I know you were kidding. I edited my post to note that it's a fair jab at me. And now that I read it again, yes, you did say close to double digit homers, so that is completely different, so ... waste of a few posts discussing Pedroia comps. davell, it's not my home state. I lived in it for two years, I got a Terry Kirby signature somewhere (some dental competition ... well not really ... some draw a picture of a smiling face with good teeth competition ... I guess Terry Kirby had a good smile and they invited him there for that? Or maybe it was just because he was the big star in Virginia at the time.), but sorry, if I claimed a home state, it would be north of there (decade plus in New York, most of my life in Maryland).

I was hoping no one would ever bring him up, so not to jinx it. But that's exactly what I see Torreyes becoming, minus a little speed. I've been avoiding this comp for another player in the Cubs system, and you won't get me to type it out (at least, I doubt I'll type it out at any point this year) ... but the positive scenario you guys are hoping for with Torreyes is to essentially become ... Dustin Pedroia. I see Torreyes with more power than Altuve, but not as much as Pedroia. I think the glut of middle IF prospects that the Cubs have, will allow them to trade Barney this offseason if a team falls in love with him and is willing to throw a bigger need/good prospect the Cubs way. If they can fill 3B, they can get by with a Valbuena/Baker platoon until someone like Torreyes, Watkins, Alcantara, etc. make it to the bigs. More of a side note, but I still think that Barney can play short in the bigs, at least, decently for a few years. I wonder if a team will take the chance on trying him there. Problem is, they need to see him play some short to consider it, and that's just not happening here unless Castro gets hurt.

I was hoping no one would ever bring him up, so not to jinx it. But that's exactly what I see Torreyes becoming, minus a little speed. I've been avoiding this comp for another player in the Cubs system, and you won't get me to type it out (at least, I doubt I'll type it out at any point this year) ... but the positive scenario you guys are hoping for with Torreyes is to essentially become ... Dustin Pedroia. "You guys are hoping for", so it's official: you're pulling against Torreyes! Sorry man, had to, you left it open......Honestly, I can't see Torreyes developing 20 homer power, which keeps me from hoping for Pedroia. On the other hand, you see someone else in our system as a Pedroia comp? If so, I think it's pretty easy to see. I won't make you type it out, but his name rhymes with papaya..... I'm not pulling against Torreyes, but read what you wrote for Torreyes: in his prime, .300 hitter, 35-40 doubles, low double digit home runs, solid defensive 2nd baseman. That's an elite player. Okay, Pedroia is on the high end of that comparison scale, but Pedroia has only had one year with above a .200 ISOP, with him mostly in that .150 area. Without taking the time to do mock calculations, the numbers you have for Torreyes would get him somewhat close to a .150 ISOP. That's ... All-Star contender each year in his prime. That's ... fringe shot at being a potential HOF type (I think a lot of people (granted, mostly Bostonians) are already suggesting that Pedroia has some HOF potential, but needs to do it for a few more years). There's very few guys (I'm sure there's one or two) that I have ever envisioned as being elite, particularly at this age and level. If that's pulling against Torreyes, fine. I'm not envisioning a positive scenario that high. But ... that's an awfully high bar to set for someone in their prime. Edit: Btw, I'm fully aware you are taking a fair jab at me. I'm aware there are times where it feels like I want a Cubs prospect to fail. That's certainly not the case, but I'm aware that it can come across that way. I just wanted to point out that the numbers you've put up there for Torreyes in his prime are awfully high. Not impossibly high, but it's on the high end, and I just tend to not envision such high end numbers for most prospects, at least not these days (I'm sure there's something online somewhere where I gave some high end expectation for Cubs prospects). Btw, no it's not Amaya. I don't think Amaya will ever be good enough defensively at 2nd. It wouldn't stun me if Amaya ended up in a corner OF role. Give me until the off-season before I decide to be bold and even remotely say I see some similarities. To be clear, if you asked me, do I expect said player to become Dustin Pedroia-ish, I would say, heck no. I'm not crazy. But I see some similarities between the two, I actually thought it would be fairly obvious who I had in mind.

Well, the thing is, very few teams are going to fork over high upside ready/close to ready arms. There's simply far more value in having the rights to those guys for 6 years than 1 year of Garza. It's not impossible, but I find that to be quite tough to do in the off-season (I would think there's a greater chance of that happening at mid-season next year, than this winter, because some team could be desperate enough to go the way the ... say ... Giants and Indians did last year when they forked over Wheeler and Pomeranz for hopes at a run). _____ You make it sound like the Phillies got Hamels at a discount. He got one of the richest contracts for a SP in MLB history.

Really nice back to back games for Geiger. Another hit for Marco. 8 game hitting streak. Of course, the last two times I noted positive things about Marco of late, he ended up doing squat, offensively, the rest of the game. By tomorrow, I should be able to note how Marco's last 10 games looks really good (right now, he has an 0-5 on 7/21 hurting things.

I was hoping no one would ever bring him up, so not to jinx it. But that's exactly what I see Torreyes becoming, minus a little speed. I've been avoiding this comp for another player in the Cubs system, and you won't get me to type it out (at least, I doubt I'll type it out at any point this year) ... but the positive scenario you guys are hoping for with Torreyes is to essentially become ... Dustin Pedroia.

The positive scenario for Torreyes is better, IMO. He's a better defensive player, and if things go well, he would provide similar offensive ability, potentially, with fewer K's (although I expect, even in a positive scenario, that his K rate would climb a tiny bit as he moves up the ladder, so the gap in the K rate might not be that much).