CubsWin

- Almora put up .257/.297/.384 against RHP last year. He put up .263/.289/.380 in 2014. - Things clicked for August, got stretched to his whole second half because reasons. - I actually think he will hit alright in AAA. We saw Vitters hit in AAA too, he put up something like .300/350/.500 at 22 in Iowa. The PCL is still a friendly place to hit and a contact oriented young hitter like Almora has plenty of chance to put up a pretty looking line depsite the lack of power or patience at most other stops in the minors over any serious amount of playing time. Unlike Vitters, he can play defense so naturally his performance will be more valuable. Hopefully that helps turn into a pitcher this deadline or next winter. Heyward's awesome, zero incentive to move him for the sake of moving him to shoehorn in another Cubs prospect starter. I guess I have made up my mind in some sense. In my defense - the whole reason not to is based around his 125 ABs in August last year. I just don't see that as enough to suddenly believe Heyward is just keeping CF warm for him. Throw in the other 421 ABs he took at AA and he didn't even put up a .700 OPS at the level. You're just restating your opinion from previous posts and not really dealing with what I wrote. I never used the words "2nd half". You didn't respond to the notion that he hit really well in Low-A and then his numbers took some steps backward when he started to implement the approach adjustments the Cubs asked him to in High-A. You conveniently list his RHP splits for the two seasons he's been struggling while working on those adjustments but leave out the .308/.350/.473 line he had against them before re-tooling while in Low-A as a 19-year-old. You appear to be cherry-picking to support a conclusion you've already arrived at instead of incorporating the possible larger picture I put forth. You say the whole reason not to have already made up your mind is based solely on Almora's August. I say (and said in the previous post) the more impactful reason is the fact that he was reworking his approach and that what he accomplished in August was exactly what the Cubs had asked him to work on. He didn't just get hot. Often, when a player starts getting a lot of hits randomly, his walk rate goes down because he's hitting more balls safely. But Almora walked more (a lot more) and hit for more power. He was more selective at the plate and apparently waited for pitches he could and DID drive. He also made a physical adjustment (bringing back his leg kick) that coincided with his break out. This reality puts his August into a larger perspective that you thus far don't want to acknowledge. Vitters and Almora are similar. Both were high 1st rounders touted as having good plate coverage and the ability to make contact. Both didn't take a lot of walks. But there is some BIG differences between the two. Vitters was never coached by this developmental staff with a cohesive Cubs Way plan set forth before him. He didn't have the advanced technology Almora does, and he didn't have the make-up/work ethic Almora has. Vitters was not asked to retool his approach while at High-A and coached to stick with it. And thus, as we saw with a lot of top Cubs prospects of that era, he struggled mightily at the upper levels. I find this a poor comparison that doesn't have a lot to say about our discussion. Whether Almora struggled purely because he's started facing better competition while being 2 years young for his level or struggled for those reasons and that he was simultaneously reworking his approach is yet to be shown. All we know is he and Candelario were working on making changes once they reached High-A. Both struggled for a while. Then, on about the same timeline, both started achieving the changes they were working on. We have to see both of them continue to perform to confirm whether it was an aberration or true progression and the culmination of hard work. But there's a lot more going on here than just a hot August for Almora.

It's more "post team USA" than 2nd half. it's just easier to say second half. and it was paired with obvious mechanical changes geared toward a more powerful swing. Yeah yeah, he's also young and can play defense too. Alls I ask is that the Marlins or A's buy the spiel. I don't think Almora sucks or anything, just the Cubs can make better use of him than a bench player or the RH half of some kind of platoon situation. Or there is no need to platoon him, things actually clicked for Almora late last season, he hits AAA pitching very well this year and becomes a valuable, young, controllable, above average starting CFer which when paired up with Heyward in RF gives the Cubs a very strong defensive and offensive OF. That then allows the Cubs to trade Soler+ for a mid-20 MOR with upside next off season. I don't have a crystal ball, but I do know the Cubs started working with Almora in High-A on selectivity, waiting for and recognizing pitches he can drive and slight swing adjustments (like bringing back his leg kick late last season) to give him more power, and that's exactly what he realized and achieved after returning from Team USA. Coincidence? Maybe. Culmination of a year and a half of hard work and development? Maybe. Who can say for sure, right now? You can say "meh", have your mind basically made up about him and might turn out to be right, but I'm going to wait and see.

One of the greatest things about moving from Chicago to LA, besides the weather, was not having to see any more Menards commercials.

That's not why I'm discouraged. The money is there, even Sharma has said we've got money for these guys. The issue is most of these guys have not been cleared yet, bringing more teams into the mix. If we do get 2 of these 10, its a very solid showing, as far as I'm concerned. If we just get Ruiz, I'll be content. But I'm obviously hoping for more. We need MLB to get off their asses and clear these guys though, or its a moot point. If the latest reports were accurate, bring me Bolanos and I'm happy. I'll dream on Lourdes Jr., Ruiz and Ona.

Double post.

I should've included Candelario in the first group of guys with high-ish ceilings but lower risk than the guys still so far away in A-ball. The Cubs had him working on adjustments to tap into more power. As can be the case when re-working your approach/swing path, it was one step back at first before the two steps forward. What I like about him is that even with the struggles in High-A and the demotion thereafter, he never got down and stuck with the plan. It paid off big time once he hit AA and that power performance carried into his AFL performance. Also, by most accounts, his defense improved over that period. That tells me he's got strong make-up and work ethic. I think Caratini is in a similar position going into this year that Candelario was in last season. If he has a semi-breakout with the bat, and as you said, improves behind the plate, he'd move into that first group for me. He got hot the last month (August 8 - Sept 7) going .329/.384/.506. That may have just been a fluky streak, but when they come at the end of a season, I tend to give them a little more weight. It could be nothing, but there might be a bit of a trend with the Cubs developmental process. Maybe it's part of the Cubs Way. Maybe it's just coincidence, but it seems like at the lower levels (mostly High-A) they have their better prospects really working on developing their weaknesses. Almora and Candelario retooled their approaches. Underwood worked on developing his other pitches. Like a racehorse being held back and once they hit AA, it's more about in-game performance. Just a theory. Picking up tidbits here and there. Some reading between the lines with certain comments but also with some underlying statistics. Definitely need more data. It'd be an interesting question to ask a Cubs scout. I usually get to talk to a couple during spring training. I'll try to track one down and see what they say.

I fully expect it to change, or at least I'm hoping it will. I'm looking forward to a TJS upside guy or a prep upside arm being selected in the 1st round in coming drafts. I also think they continue to dedicate much of the middle rounds to pitching no matter who they select in the 1st. And, true, this draft will definitely be less exciting. I'm hoping the Cubs are playing so well that the draft passes and I didn't even know it. In years past, June 5th or thereabouts was a big day in my life. Now I'm hoping that day will be in late October/early November!

There will always be that mixed bag. Some will regress, some maintain, some progress incrementally and a few will breakout. Two things make me more optimistic than in years past, though. One is the Cubs' developmental team, system, infrastructure, technology and philosophy are much better and more consistent from level to level than ever before. Two, the list of players with upside is fairly long. Someone's bound to pop. For every argument about a good developmental system, all systems can go through bad downswings, even with the brightest minds involved. I would note that the Red Sox system went through some lulls when Theo was in his final years there. I never liked the Padres system, when Hoyer/McLeod were running it, as much as others, and it's been, to say the least, a mixed bag of results, despite their year where they had a ton of early picks (want to say 2011?). Andrew Friedman's final years in the Rays organization really saw them falter a bit, and Billy Beane's Oakland systems have gone through lulls before. As for the list of players with upside ... we're obviously better than the bad systems right now, but all decent-good systems have a fairly solid list of guys with some level of upside. There's only really maybe 6-8 guys in our system who seem to, as of now, have upside that is unique/exciting (and that we can hold out some hope for as of now ... I mean, Jeffrey Baez has upside, but no one is really, despite his strong finish, expecting Jeffrey Baez to really take off in that fashion as of now). Again, I'm not trying to be negative Nancy here. I think that the system is in a great shape considering the losses. No, I agree with you. The Cubs development system and staff isn't perfect. They'll have there hits and misses like everybody else. I just feel better about their chances of having some of their upside guys pop now than before the new regime arrived. And, the Jeffrey Baez thing was funny. No, he's not on my list of guys with upside who could breakout. It depends on how you define the word, I guess, but for me upside means you have enough talent to be a starter 2nd division or better/high-leverage reliever/MOR or better and aren't an extreme long shot to get there (re Jeffrey Baez). For me, that group looks like Torres, Contreras, Underwood, McKinney, Almora, Happ and Edwards (in the highest ceiling/lower risk category), Zagunis and Pierce Johnson (in a slightly lower ceiling/similar risk category) and a higher ceiling/higher risk category group of Cease, Martinez, JImenez, Steele, De La Cruz, Clifton, Wilson and Hudson.

The verdict on the "draft pitching in volume strategy" is still out. The Cubs don't have a TOR type in the upper levels and only a few that might ever become that. Cease and De La Cruz seem to be the only ones described with that kind of potential but they're so far away, anything could happen. Injury. Ineffectiveness. Move to the pen. That's the system's biggest weakness right now as I see it. I'd love to see them sign someone like Ronald Bolanos and/or Adrian Morejon to deepen that list. Seeing how Cease and De La Cruz do this year will tell us a lot. I'm interested in seeing who, if anyone, from the list of Underwood, Clifton, Steele, Sands, Kellogg or even Stinnett, Null, Paulino, Alzolay, Twomey or Bloomquist can unlock something and take it up a notch. I think Hudson will move more slowly but he's obviously on that list as well. Williams went from afterthought to BOR prospect and a mention on BA's top 31. Markey emerged as a middle relief possibility or maybe more. Who will it be this year? The sheer volume of guys improves the chances of someone surprising us. As a deep sleeper, I'm interested to see what Luis Hernandez will do.

There will always be that mixed bag. Some will regress, some maintain, some progress incrementally and a few will breakout. Two things make me more optimistic than in years past, though. One is the Cubs' developmental team, system, infrastructure, technology and philosophy are much better and more consistent from level to level than ever before. Two, the list of players with upside is fairly long. Someone's bound to pop.

I agree. Once you get into that middle pack of systems, it's in the eye of the beholder. Those teams are pretty interchangeable. Given all the top end talent has graduated (and unprecedented amount at that), a big step back was predictable. What I like is that this system didn't become devoid of talent afterwards. If some of that depth continues to progress, they sees poised to be right back in the lower top 10 in a couple of years, maybe even next year. There are a lot of players poised to move up in the rankings. If Contreras hits well in AAA and improves his receiving and game-calling, or Almora and Candelario continue on their trajectory of last year's 2nd half, or Torres puts together a solid season in High-A (usually a pretty pitcher dominant level), or Underwood pitches well in AA with an uptick in Ks, or McKinney dominates in AA with the bat and a few of Cease, De La Cruz, Martinez, Happ, Wilson, Jimenez, Clifton, etc. break out, things will look pretty different. There's a lot of depth, true, but there's some higher ceiling depth as well.

My bad on Steele's age. I read his birth year as 1996 for some reason. Now that you've remembered Eloy, at least include the "en" in his last name... :P

i don't know what criteria exactly you were using, but I definitely put: Eloy Jimenez (19 all season) Justin Steele (19, 20 in July) Wladimir Galindo (19 all season) ...on that list. Carlos Sepulveda showed a solid approach in the AZL as an 18 year old last season (.350 OBP, 14% K, 9% BB). He'll 19 almost all of next season (turns 20 in late August). As of now, the fact that he's pretty much only a 2B hurts his prospect status, but the bat showed some promise last season.

Sounds like Bolanos and Ona would great gets if they become available before the June 15th deadline.

So after graduating Bryant, Russell, Schwarber, Soler and Baez, the Cubs currently still have 4 guys in MLB's top 10 players at their position lists. Willson Contreras is the #1 ranked catcher. Ian Happ is the #3 ranked 2B. Gleyber Torres is the #9 ranked SS. And Jeimer Candelario is the #7 ranked 3B. Not bad.

This is basically what i would've replied if I were on a computer and not my phone. And complaining about projections being too low when they ultimately combine for a 95 win median team projection seems kinda silly. Your last paragraph seems to ring especially true when our rookies came in as big league ready as their play showed last year. I wouldn't expect a lot of improvement and I would be more than happy if they were about the same as last year. Unfortunately, I never clarified which ones I found weird or complained they were too low. I was writing with the idea that it wouldn't be clinically picked apart. Just off the cuff generalities written while under the weather. It's a only a little weird to me to predict two guys with less than a full season each will miss 97 games combined, but I can understand a machine spitting it out. All were reasonable to me except for Rondon. He had him dropping from 1.67 and a WHIP of 1.00 to 3.32 and a WHIP of 1.18. That's worse than his career averages and way worse than 2014. If he's in his 30s, I could understand that projection a bit more. That's the one I didn't get. Some of the other ones were just...weird. The starts by Johnson and Jokisch. Who's playing DH. But hey, these are projections churned out by an algorithm based on a lot of players past performances, not nuanced predictions.

Those weren't the ones I was calling weird, though. You missed my point entirely, but that's on me as I was not specific about which ones I found weird. I expect a reliever to regress after having a great year, but not that much. That was weird. I expect Russell and Soler to improve a bit at the plate, but projecting them the way he did wasn't weird. I expect Warren and Cahill to get shots at starts before Johnson and Jokisch. That was weird. I expect injuries for players who have a history of them to be factored in. That wasn't weird. If I were to create a projection system that included breaking down who gets games at DH, I wouldn't project Baez to get 16 and Schwarber/Soler to get none. That was really weird.

There should be some general acceptance that these guys are not close to what the Cubs just pulled off with Bryant (top 2 pick, top prospect in all of baseball), Schwarber (4th overall pick), Soler (30 million dollar prospect), and Russell (top 5 prospect in baseball by age 19/20). Hell, even in the ML group there's a tier system - Bryant's in a whole other league from even the four listed above, personally Russell's the only one really close. While guys like Edwards, Almora, Candelario, Contreras, and McKinney can hang around in this league, even possibly start one day in this league, they can't/haven't hit like those guys up top and shouldn't be viewed to be as automatic as those guys were. I think I'm higher on Almora than everyone else on this board. Almora's second stint at AA, he was a year younger than Inciarte and two younger than Pollock in their respective stints, and his peripherals look pretty similar to their with a little more power than Inciarte and a little less than Pollock. His first season there was plagued with a hamate injury and family issues IIRC, so I'm not as concerned that it was such a down season, especially given his age. I'm also higher on him than most. What has me most hopeful is his 2nd half last season. He had been working on being more selective and waiting for pitches he could drive. The thought was, of course, that he'd eliminate a lot of his weak contact raising his batting average while making pitchers challenge him raising his power numbers. That is exactly what happened in the 2nd half. All of this coincided with his adding a leg kick and time spent with Team USA. I'm still not buying his breakout. I need to see more in AAA this year. But, for me, his ceiling is still high and he has time to reach it.

So it looks like, according to him, Addison Russell and Jorge Soler suffer some pretty big injuries missing a combined 97 games. The under 25 guys don't improve very much if at all. Edwards, P. Johnson and Jokisch each get five starts instead of Warren, Wood or Cahill. LaStella, Szczur (who probably doesn't make it out of ST with the Cubs), Coghlan and Baez (despite the fact that he's one of the best and most versatile defenders on the roster) each DH 16 games while Schwarber and Soler DH none. And Hector Rondon regresses big time despite being 28 and at his peak. I agree with much of the rotation's projection. I expect Arrieta and Lackey to regress a bit. It seems to me Heyward's numbers are low but in the ballpark. Rizzo maintains. But a lot of these just seem weird. Not completely unreasonable, just weird. I get that these are not predictions but projections, and that they are the result of some sort of rigid algorithm without applying baseball logic outside of the math, but... really? Couldn't your projection system account for a little bit more logic and baseball sense than that?

MLB.com hasn't updated their top 100 list for 2016 yet, but when they do there will be some movement among the catching position. As it currently stands, the top ranked C is Jorge Alfaro at 59. The only other C in the top 100 is Tyler Stephenson at 93. MLB.com just came out with their top catching prospects list and Willson Contreras, who currently isn't ranked in the top 100, is ranked #1.

I believe it. He put up a ~.750 OPS over his last 400 regular season PAs, something like that. Frandy de la Rosa was actually traded to the Rangers for a AAA pitcher, Patten. South Bend should definitely be way more interesting than last year when it was basically just Torres. Kellogg, Twomey, Sands, Steele, and de la Cruz should open the season in the starting rotation. Happ at 2B with those three OFers would be an improvement from last year's group after Torres. I would give Wilson a shot at getting a taste of full season ball, most likely he is playing in SS Eugene. Galindo less so, I think he opens up in Arizona. The college group from last year - Happ, Kellogg, Dewees, Twomey - should carry expectations to move quickly - say June - to MB. Pretty sure craig meant De La Cruz since Delarosa isn't a pitcher.

This also could be a ploy to up some offers and if they don't get there, then he might just wait. Cubs are known to find a price point they're comfortable with and stick to it, so it may not make a difference with them.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/14554006/cincinnati-reds-cuban-ss-alfredo-rodriguez-agree-6-million-deal Don't know what that quote means exactly. Could be it's not official yet. Could mean Rodriguez's agents jumped the gun or put out a "price setting" rumor. Could mean, as you suggested, that Cincy has an agreement with him that it will be official once the next signing period starts.

If you're talking prospects, I agree, it does seem backwards. But the prices we've seen are for already established big league #1s and #2s. They've made it through the minors and have proven themselves. The injury risk still remains simply because they're a pitcher, but the rarity of true TORs balances out the injury risk. And, of course, trades are affected by many other factors including the mentality of the team's upper management (i.e. Dave Stewart, as you pointed out). Other GMs might point to the haul the Braves got, but it won't hold much water. Every team is unique in their phase of development, pressure to win, roster make-up, championship window and management philosophy/personality. I agree, I can't see Theo & Jed ever agreeing to trading an all-star caliber CFer, and 2 top prospect for someone like MIller either. In the case of the D-backs, they are all in with the signing of Grienke and 3 years of control on Goldschmidt and Pollack, their window is clearly defined. They had to maximize their opportunity and badly needed a strong #2 in their rotation in order to do so. The Cubs may be in that position down the road if Arrieta leaves, but for now they have a solid #2 in Lester. Lackey buys them 2 years to develop a #3 with Underwood the most likely candidate. The Hamels trade was just 6 months ago. In the world of trades, it's very individualized and things change pretty quickly. And can change back, too.

I kinda agree, especially this year, with taking a TJS injury risk on a guy who would've gone a lot higher or taking 1 tough sign HS guy and blowing the wad on him and then going signability. Going forward I still would like to mostly the F pitchers mentality and take college bats early then going the volume route on pitching. I think the Cubs will stick to BPA but, if they are picking consistently in the upper 20s, pitchers and hitters will be more even in their grading system than in the top 10. So we may end up seeing the Cubs take more arms as a result. I personally want them to take guys with a shot at TOR status, so that would mean, as you pointed out, going the riskier TJS/prep arm route, but I doubt that fits Theo & Jed's thinking. If this trend of outrageous prices for TOR talent (both in money and talent) continues, maybe their thinking will change.