Outshined_One

I insist on this response because I have actually seen Vitters in person and I have had the pleasure of speaking to people who know way more about baseball than I do about Vitters. In the times I saw Vitters, I rarely saw him extend his zone and chase bad pitches. He clearly had enough knowledge of the zone to keep from swinging at pitches in the dirt. From my understanding, as I did not see him in the FSL or SL, his problem has been with borderline pitches and good pitches in the zone. As Vitters has advanced and adapted, he has become much better about recognizing those pitches. However, we have only seen short stretches of that because of the Cubs' insistence on rushing the guy for whatever reason. I will whole-heartedly agree that, at a similar age, Aramis Ramirez was a better prospect than Josh Vitters. Ramirez had a fantastic season in AAA and a nondescript cup of coffee in the majors. At 20/21, Ramirez was more advanced than Vitters is when it came to plate discipline. However, also like Vitters, Ramirez was rushed, jumping from High A to AAA to the majors in one season. I am willing to argue that Ramirez's struggles in the majors were much like Vitters' struggles in the minors; both men had difficulty adjusting to a higher level of competition and needed time to make those adjustments. Given time, both men were able to adapt their games and succeed. Vitters' problem is that the Cubs have rushed him to the point where it's difficult to tell from a statistical standpoint whether or not Vitters had a hot streak or whether he finally figured things out. In my opinion, when he was with Peoria over his hot month, he had figured things out at that level. My firm belief is, while Ramirez was more advanced than Vitters at the same age, Vitters has the comparable raw tools he needs to become an Aramis Ramirez-like hitter. For clarification purposes, realistically speaking, I have an enormously difficult time seeing Josh Vitters become Aramis Ramirez. Defensively, the nagging injuries and the way the Cubs are handling him in instructs and in the AFL lead me to believe he'll be moving to the OF or 1B. I think he's a good enough athlete to play 3B effectively, but for whatever reason his reflexes and footwork seem kind of...off to me. As a hitter, there's enough to like to make me think he could be a league average bat at 1B or in the OF, but there's enough to dislike to make me wonder whether he'll end up being a RH power hitter off the bench. With that out of the way, though, I believe he still has the physical and mental tools needed to do what Aramis Ramirez has done. The odds of him developing those tools to reach that point are minuscule...but there's still a chance.

You're right. He's an abject failure who will never amount to anything. My bad.

I think the best the Cubs can hope for with Soriano is that he posts a strong enough 2011 season that some team would be willing to take him on from 2012-2014 in the following offseason. Another healthy season with production like 2007/2008 would go a long, long way. The Cubs could be able to trade Soriano if they eat a decent chunk of the (guh) $54m owed to Soriano over that stretch and take a bad contract back in return. However, the words "sunk cost" start coming to mind with Soriano.

Ramirez's years in Pittsburgh tell a very different story, though. In the minors, it is true that he had good plate discipline and K/BB, but during his time with Pittsburgh, he racked up quite a few Ks while having trouble drawing walks. It wasn't until 2004 that he started getting a handle on his Ks in the majors. Vitters has yet to demonstrate the ability to keep Ks down while drawing a respectable number of walks over a consistent stretch, but the question was about pure upside, rather than what realistically can be expected of him.

Guh. 10/6 From the comments: 10/7 From the comments:

According to ESPN's Game Score, Lincecum (96) just had a better game than Halladay's no hitter (94).

Derrek Lee looked like he had no idea what was coming on that strike three.

So it's just assumed that Vitters has the highest upside? How high is that upside now? I know people raved about his raw abilities and how even though he might not walk a lot he might put together one of those rare high average, high power, low walk careers. But we know he's not going to be Vladdy. He's not even going to be Aramis. What is his upside, and is there really nobody else in the system that's higher? Is he a worse hitting Adrian Beltre without the defense? There's no question he has to stick at 3B to be considered to have any chance at upside, right? I'd disagree that Vitters' upside is the highest in the system, but I'd put him in the top 5 for that (behind guys like Lake and Archer). Vitters' stock is down, but he was very young for AA and the Cubs' handling of him has me wondering whether we'd be talking about him as the top prospect in the system had the Cubs left him in the FSL. Moreover, while his plate discipline leaves something to be desired, he's always had a good eye...but an impatient trigger to go with that eye. It's also worth remembering that he is the best power hitting prospect in this system by a good margin. His upside is probably somewhere in the Aramis Ramirez range, maybe a tick below that, depending on whether he becomes more selective. If he moves to 1B or the OF, his upside diminishes. I think his athleticism should be good enough to make him an above average defender at those positions, plus his bat should be roughly league average at those spots.

Brett Favre has his hands full and is trying to get some time in with the guys.

Can't fault them for that; lots of people are in love with him. He offers an intriguing ceiling to go with the floor of a solid everyday 2B, in my opinion. I'm not worried about him sticking...but that's me. He's not exactly an exciting prospect, but there are plenty of reasons to like him. Guyer was the most surprising name on this list, to be frank. The guy went completely bonkers in the second half, but he's always struck me as a 4th OF type because I'm not sure he's got the range for the center or the bat for a corner. Who knows, though?

Link Pretty much confirms what everyone here knows: the Cubs did a better job than any team in MLB when it came to wasting money.

Considering I'm rooting against the Reds, this pleases me.

The Cubs' first round pick is protected, yes. If he's a Type A, the Dodgers would get the Cubs' second round pick along with a sandwich pick between the first and second rounds. If he's a Type B, the Cubs wouldn't forfeit anything and the Dodgers would get a sandwich pick between the first and second rounds. All of the above is contingent on the Dodgers offering Lilly arbitration, by the way. If they don't offer it, they get nothing.

You mean 2 minutes ago, or 5 minutes ago, or 6 minutes ago, or 6 minutes 7 seconds ago, or 9 minutes ago.............................. They are showing him a lot. See we do need a baseball man. Doug Glanville for President!

Nelson Cruz just hit one out of the country.

Sounds similar to Shin-Soo Choo, which isn't exactly a bad thing. Considering Choo posted a 5.7 WAR this past season, that's actually a really good thing.

I figured they'd be cheap. Actually, now that I think about it, I'm going to swap out David DeJesus with Alex Gordon.

Ross isn't a FA; he's got another year with the Giants ahead of them. The problem the Giants have is that they currently have a lot of OFs on their roster without enough room to play all of them. He's always struck me as the kind of guy I could see the Cubs pursuing. I figure Hendry would go crazy if he didn't make a trade or two in the offseason. As for DeJesus, apparently the Royals picked up his 2011 option. Hm, didn't see that. I figured he'd be a good left-handed option off the bench who could periodically spell guys in the OF. I was thinking of him more as a Colvin-like guy where he'd be on the bench, but still get something in the neighborhood of 350 ABs over the course of a season. Still, I'll have to mull over who would take his place as the token left handed OF on the bench. I have indeed resigned myself to the fact that Fukudome will be traded. He won't get the Cubs a draft pick when his contract is up due to a weird quirk in the MLB rules involving recently posted Japanese players and arbitration. I get the feeling that Hendry would think Colvin versus Fukudome is a wash in terms of production relative to contract. There will be interest in Fukudome in the offseason and I think there's a good chance the Cubs won't have to pick up any money in a deal. Ideally, I'd like to see Fukudome back in RF next season. I just don't think that will happen.

According to mlbtraderumors he will definitely be an A. Question is whether or not the Dodgers offer arbitration. McCourt's divorce only muddles the situation.

As things stand now, what do you predict the Cubs' 2011 roster will look like come Opening Day? Mine: C Geovany Soto 1B Lyle Overbay 2B Blake DeWitt SS Starlin Castro 3B Aramis Ramirez LF Alfonso Soriano CF Marlon Byrd RF Tyler Colvin BN OF Cody Ross BN OF Alex Gordon BN IF Darwin Barney BN IF Jeff Baker BN C Koyie Hill (you know it's coming) SP Ryan Dempster (Opening Day Starter) SP Carlos Zambrano SP Randy Wells SP Tom Gorzelanny SP Carlos Silva CL Carlos Marmol RP Sean Marshall RP Andrew Cashner RP John Grabow RP James Russell RP Esmailin Caridad RP Jeff Samardzija

http://www.northsidebaseball.com/forum/topic?f=29&t=58394

Interesting note from yesterday: Sounds like Kurcz had a nice outing, too.

I want Rangers/Giants for the WS, with the Giants winning in the end. I like both teams for some reason. However, something tells me we'll end up with Phillies/Yankees with the Yankees winning...again.

Freaking Badgers. That was a painful game to watch.

I'm not so sure about that sentiment. The Cubs won't necessarily become a WS contender by trading for Gonzalez, but he would be a substantial upgrade over Dunn in terms of youth and production. With Gonzalez at 1B and the bullpen shored up, this team could conceivably win 88-90 games next year. Moreover, if you trade for Gonzalez and sign him to an extension (which would be the goal, in my mind), you can still try out some of the prospects next season, let money fall off the books, and aim for a WS title in 2012/2013 with Gonzalez on the team. To me, the key questions are whether the Padres would be willing to trade him (doubtful), what the Padres would want for him (a lot), and the likelihood of signing Gonzalez to an extension is (pretty good, from the looks of it). If this team can get Gonzalez without giving up half the farm, I say do it.