Cub's Prospect Watch And Development Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

patg006

New member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
1,413
Liked Posts:
986
Location:
Chicago
However, we don't know if Appel would have signed with the Cubs last year. That was the reason he was there at pick #6. I agree, I wanted pitching this year as well, but in no way will I complain about Bryant. I trust the Cubs as evaluators. If the Cubs do wind up trading Samardzija then hopefully that criticism about the pitching talent is no longer valid. I like when teams like the Jays are shying away because of the price. That tells me the Cubs are going to stick to their guns until they inevitably find a trade partner, in the same manner the Garza situation played out.

He would have signed. The cubs would have had to pay more, sure. The slot assignment was 2.9 mil at the 8th pick, and he turned down 3.8; something he was worth WAY more than. I would have given him top pick compensation, went after Pierce as well and sign him as well as prioritize the most liked out of Blackburn, Underwood, McNeil, Prieto, etc. Cubs gave Almora 3.9. I would have drafted Appel and started at 4.5 and prepare to have gone up. He was the best player 2 years in a row.

Teams that are afraid that they cant sign a player to me dont want to win. Cubs went after and got Prior after Minnesota feared he wouldn't sign.
 

Jntg4

Fire Forum Moderator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
26,017
Liked Posts:
3,297
Location:
Minnesota
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  2. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Chicago State Cougars
  2. DePaul Blue Demons
  3. Illinois-Chicago Flames
  4. Loyola Ramblers
  5. Northern Illinois Huskies
  6. Northwestern Wildcats
He would have signed. The cubs would have had to pay more, sure. The slot assignment was 2.9 mil at the 8th pick, and he turned down 3.8; something he was worth WAY more than. I would have given him top pick compensation, went after Pierce as well and sign him as well as prioritize the most liked out of Blackburn, Underwood, McNeil, Prieto, etc. Cubs gave Almora 3.9. I would have drafted Appel and started at 4.5 and prepare to have gone up. He was the best player 2 years in a row.

Teams that are afraid that they cant sign a player to me dont want to win. Cubs went after and got Prior after Minnesota feared he wouldn't sign.

Then there were several teams that draft that didn't want to win.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
17,955
Liked Posts:
2,775
Location:
San Diego
It is hard to say he would have signed at 4.5. He was looking at #1 cash and we would have to look at the over slot amount. So if they go over then they have to go under with the rest of the draft. So the draft may have been Appel and a few 4 year seniors that have no pull. They would have been able to sign any HS's.

Most teams have a plan going into the draft and have to play to their budget. Just like KC last year. They signed a easy sign the first round so they could use that bonus pick to get the lefty from Indiana over slot.

There is a strategy to it. Cubs signing Appel at #1 slot with #6 cash allot would nix the draft for them. That was not something they were willing to do.

Neither were other teams because he fell 5 spots.

Is what it is. Spilled milk.
 

SilenceS

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
21,672
Liked Posts:
9,485
Chicago Cubs Top 20 Prospects for 2014


The list and grades are a blending of present performance and long-term potential. Comments are welcome, but in the end all analysis and responsibility is mine. Full reports on all of players can be found in the 2014 Baseball Prospect Book. We are now taking pre-orders for the book, so order early and order often!

All of these grades are preliminary and subject to change.

QUICK PRIMER ON GRADE MEANINGS:

Grade A prospects are the elite. They have a reasonable chance of becoming stars or superstars. In theory, most Grade A prospects develop into major league regulars, if injuries or unanticipated problems don't intervene. Note that is a major "if" in some cases.


Grade B prospects have a good chance to enjoy successful careers. Some will develop into stars, some will not. Most end up spending several years in the majors, at the very least in a marginal role.


Grade C prospects are the most common type. These are guys who have something positive going for them, but who may have a question mark or three, or who are just too far away from the majors to get an accurate feel for. A few Grade C guys, especially at the lower levels, do develop into stars. Some end up as role players or bench guys. Many don't make it at all.


Also note that there is diversity within each category. I'm a tough grader; Grade C+ is actually good praise, and some C+ prospects (especially at lower levels) turn out very well indeed.

Finally, keep in mind that all grades are shorthand. You have to read the full comment in the book for my full opinion about a player, the letter grade only tells you so much. A Grade C prospect in rookie ball could end up being very impressive, while a Grade C prospect in Triple-A is likely just a future role player.

1) Javier Baez, SS, Grade A: Otherworldy bat speed and an aggressive approach plus the tools to (maybe) stay at shortstop if he can get the errors down. If not, he’d slot great at third base. There’s some risk here due to contact but I think he can be a Giancarlo Stanton-type hitter. The commonly-used Gary Sheffield comp works in terms of bat speed, but Sheffield had a much more refined approach and I don’t think Baez will hit for a Sheffield-like average. That doesn’t mean he can’t be a star.

2) Kris Bryant, 3B, Grade A: Should be a devastating power hitter, perhaps something like Ryan Braun crossed with Troy Glaus. Personally I think his glove at third base is pretty good, but he may end up in the outfield anyway due to roster factors. I have Baez ahead due to the difference in age and speed but they aren’t far apart, and Bryant has a higher floor.

3) Alberto Almora, OF, Grade A-: Looks like he's going to do what he was supposed to do: hit for average with moderate power and play great defense. Instincts help solid tools play up.

4) Jorge Soler, OF, Grade B+: Injury and questions about makeup hampered his stock somewhat in '13, but he crushed High-A pitching when healthy. If the intangibles don't get in the way he should be another potent bat.

5) C.J. Edwards, RHP, Grade B+: Matt Garza Trade acquisition from the Texas Rangers became Chicago's best pitching prospect. Slight build at 6-2, 155, but very athletic, quick arm, rapid development of secondary stuff to go with 93-95 MPH fastball made him dominant in A-ball.

6) Arismendy Alcantara, INF, Grade B: Took large step forward in Double-A, showing power, speed, improved on-base skills, and tools to excel defensively at second base.

7) Pierce Johnson, RHP, Grade B: 2012 supplemental first round pick from Missouri State lived up to expectations with solid A-ball campaign, using low-90s fastball, solid curve and changeup. Projects as a mid-rotation starter, assuming durability (which has been questioned in the past) holds up.

8) Jeimer Candelario, 3B, Grade B: Solid in Low-A at age 19, hit .256/.346/.396 for Kane County although scouting reports were more enthusiastic than the pure numbers. Stands out for youth, switch-hitting power potential, a good measure of strike zone judgment, and a good arm.

9) Dan Vogelbach, 1B, Grade B: Yes, everyone knows he's 6-0, 260, and he'll always have to work hard to keep the weight from getting out of control. His bat is excellent though: not just a power hitter, he has pure hitting skills with a great batting eye and better knack for contact than most young sluggers.

10) Christian Villanueva, 3B, Grade B-: Some are disappointed in him, but his 2013 Double-A season was actually very similar to his '12 High-A season; his wRC+ actually improved from 121 to 126 as he's hitting for more power now, and he still has a good glove. Skills look like they are holding steady to me; the problem is that he's being pushed by guys like Baez and Bryant who have higher upsides. But on his own terms Villanueva is still an interesting prospect.

11) Arodys Vizcaino, RHP, Grade C+: Hard to know what to make of him since he hasn't pitched in two years after difficult Tommy John recovery, although he reportedly had his stuff back in instructional league. 95 MPH fastball and big curve could make him a bullpen force if he can stay healthy.

12) Mike Olt, 3B, Grade C+: Another injury guy; blurred vision resulting from a concussion ruined both his hitting and his defense. If his eyes and brain are OK, he can still be a low-batting-average, high-power slugger with a very valuable glove. Track health reports closely this spring.

13) Neil Ramirez, RHP, Grade C+: Yet another guy acquired from the Rangers, Ramirez has a quality fastball/changeup/breaking ball combination and posts strong strikeout rates, but can be erratic. Durability concerns may move him to the bullpen but he's got upside.

14) Matt Szczur, OF, Grade C+: Good athlete, good defense, should hit for a decent average, but not a power hitter and needs to use his speed better on the bases. Looks like a solid fourth outfielder to me.

15) Josh Vitters, OF, Grade C+: Although injured most of the year with hamstring troubles, Vitters hit very very well at Iowa when healthy (wRC+136). He has nothing left to prove in Triple-A but the bad taste of his horrible 2012 major league trial lingers. Moving to the outfield for 2014, he still has a brief window of opportunity before getting swamped by Baez, Bryan, Almora, and Soler, but Vitters needs to get hot and stay hot now.

16) Kyle Hendricks, RHP, Grade C+: Outstanding performance record: 2.00 ERA, 13-4, 128/34 K/BB in 166 innings between Double-A and Triple-A. Scouts have doubts since he doesn't throw hard and relies on deception, but continued pitching of this quality will force a trial soon and he could be a useful inning-eater.

17) Corey Black, RHP, Grade C+: Acquired from Yankees in Alfonso Soriano deal, Black has better velocity than Hendricks and a higher physical ceiling but is a year behind on the development track. Should open 2014 in Double-A, some see a potentially decent mid-rotation starter, others a more dominant bullpen force.

18) Rob Zastryzny, LHP, Grade C+: Second round pick from the University of Missouri in 2013, performed well in 24 pro innings. Fastball varies between 87 and 95 MPH, secondary pitches have promise.

19) Ivan Pineyro, RHP, Grade C+: Another 2013 trade acquisition, from the Nationals for Scott Hairston, posted 3.29 ERA with 111/31 K/BB in 126 innings in A-ball. Good fastball/changeup combination, still working on breaking pitches, like Black he could wind up in the bullpen down the line.

20) Paul Blackburn, RHP, Grade C+: Supplemental first round pick from California high school in 2012, held his own in Northwest League with a good sinker, secondary pitches need work but he's got development potential worth tracking.

21) Kevin Encarnacion, OF, Grade C+: Took him three years to get out of the Dominican Summer League but made up for lost time with a .355/.431/.566 line for Boise. At age 21 he was the equivalent of a college junior however, so I'd like to see more at higher levels especially since he struggled in 16 games in Low-A. He's got tools and could wind up being very good, but I want more data before buying in completely.

OTHERS: Gioskar Amaya, 2B; Yasiel Balaguert, OF; Dallas Beeler, RHP; Shawon Dunston Jr, OF; Jacob Hannemann, OF; Brett Jackson, OF; Eloy Jimenez, OF; Eric Jokisch, LHP; Dillon Maples, RHP; Brett Marshall, RHP; Jefferson Mejia, RHP; Armando Rivero, RHP; Gleyber Torres, SS; Jen-Ho Tseng, RHP; Logan Watkins, INF; Ben Wells, RHP.

There are about 15 other guys you could mention, and several of the "other" category players like Eloy Jimenez and Gleyber Torres have very high ceilings but just haven't played enough yet to get a valid feeling for. I particularly like Jefferson Mejia on the pitching side; he could be very good.

The Cubs system has improved quickly in a short period of time, at least on the hitting side. Baez, Bryant, Almora, and Soler give them four potential All-Stars. That is going to be one scary lineup three years from now. And that doesn't even account for guys like Candelario, Alcantara, and Vogelbach, who are also potential regulars, and several others who should be useful role players. If Mike Olt can fully recover from his concussion, he can also be a regular.

The pitching is obviously much thinner, but is improving, thanks in large part to trade acquisitions. Edwards is very intriguing and has the best overall package despite his size, but he's not the only one: Ramirez, Black, and Pineyro also added some valuable depth. Along with Zastryzny, the 2013 draft added some additional promising arms like Tyler Skulina, Scott Frazier, Trey Mazek, David Garner, and Zack Godley. I also like lefty Sam Wilson as a sleeper prospect. Adding more arms to the system was the obvious strategy in the middle rounds.

Overall, while the system needs additional pitching, the Cubs under Theo Epstein and Jed Hoyer have made it very clear that they'll invest heavy funds in farm development, targeting a mixture of high-ceiling and high-floor talent in the draft while sparing no expense on the international front. They need more time, but it will work.

http://www.minorleagueball.com/2014/1/8 ... s-for-2014
 

daddies3angels

Is it next year yet?
Donator
Joined:
Apr 17, 2010
Posts:
10,038
Liked Posts:
819
Location:
Peoria IL
Hopefully those A pan out then Cubs lineup should be a power house.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,722
Liked Posts:
3,723
Back when the Royals had "the best farm system ever"(2011) they had 9 players in baseball america's top 100 which was the only time that's ever happened.

8. Eric Hosmer, 1b
9. Mike Moustakas, 3b
10. Wil Myers, of/c
18. John Lamb, lhp
19. Mike Montgomery, lhp
51. Christian Colon, ss
68. Danny Duffy, lhp
69. Jake Odorizzi, rhp
83. Chris Dwyer, lhp

BA's top 100 isn't out yet but scouts.com is.

#8 Albert Almora
#10 Kris Bryant
#13 Javier Baez
#44 CJ Edwards
#53 Jorge Soler
#80 Dan Vogelbach
#84 Pierce Johnson
#88 Arismendy Alcantara

Why I bring this up is the cubs have the #4 pick in this coming draft which generally gets you a top 50 ranking. For example Kohl Stewart was the #4 pick and scouts has him at #39. It's possibly Baez and Alcantara see enough time in the majors for them to no longer be considered. But, if they don't the cubs have a very good shot to have a similar and possibly better farm system next year. Also, this doesn't include possible returns from trading Shark. It also doesn't take account of players making a jump. Many scouts are quite high on Jeimer Candelario for example. To be fair, it's also possible a prospect highly regarded falls off the list do to a bad year.

Obviously the Royals system thus far hasn't panned out like you would hope for something that hyped. However, things would probably look a bit more bullish if they still had Odorizzi and Meyers. Even then, this group of players for KC has them on the cusp of playoffs. The takeaway here is even with the "failure" of the Royals system, they are on the verge of being a playoff team probably for the next 3-5 years. If you project a similar level on the cubs you're talking about 2016ish. And presumably the cubs also have the ability to add via FA more than KC did.

To put this into perspective, this basically means the 10th best prospect in the cubs system is around the 5th best prospects in most systems and maybe even higher.
 

DewsSox79

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 24, 2010
Posts:
29,061
Liked Posts:
7,246
Back when the Royals had "the best farm system ever"(2011) they had 9 players in baseball america's top 100 which was the only time that's ever happened.

8. Eric Hosmer, 1b
9. Mike Moustakas, 3b
10. Wil Myers, of/c
18. John Lamb, lhp
19. Mike Montgomery, lhp
51. Christian Colon, ss
68. Danny Duffy, lhp
69. Jake Odorizzi, rhp
83. Chris Dwyer, lhp

BA's top 100 isn't out yet but scouts.com is.

#8 Albert Almora
#10 Kris Bryant
#13 Javier Baez
#44 CJ Edwards
#53 Jorge Soler
#80 Dan Vogelbach
#84 Pierce Johnson
#88 Arismendy Alcantara

Why I bring this up is the cubs have the #4 pick in this coming draft which generally gets you a top 50 ranking. For example Kohl Stewart was the #4 pick and scouts has him at #39. It's possibly Baez and Alcantara see enough time in the majors for them to no longer be considered. But, if they don't the cubs have a very good shot to have a similar and possibly better farm system next year. Also, this doesn't include possible returns from trading Shark. It also doesn't take account of players making a jump. Many scouts are quite high on Jeimer Candelario for example. To be fair, it's also possible a prospect highly regarded falls off the list do to a bad year.

Obviously the Royals system thus far hasn't panned out like you would hope for something that hyped. However, things would probably look a bit more bullish if they still had Odorizzi and Meyers. Even then, this group of players for KC has them on the cusp of playoffs. The takeaway here is even with the "failure" of the Royals system, they are on the verge of being a playoff team probably for the next 3-5 years. If you project a similar level on the cubs you're talking about 2016ish. And presumably the cubs also have the ability to add via FA more than KC did.

To put this into perspective, this basically means the 10th best prospect in the cubs system is around the 5th best prospects in most systems and maybe even higher.

the royals are not a playoff team. to compare the cubs and royals is absolute craziness. It seems that you are grasping for anything to get your mind away from the negativity.


Sent from my Rotary Phone using Tapatalk
 

Boobaby1

New member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2013
Posts:
2,236
Liked Posts:
1,180
the royals are not a playoff team. to compare the cubs and royals is absolute craziness. It seems that you are grasping for anything to get your mind away from the negativity.


Sent from my Rotary Phone using Tapatalk

What negativity? Who couldn't be happier with this team? :clap:
 

Capt. Serious

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 17, 2010
Posts:
19,670
Liked Posts:
6,433
Location:
Chicago
What negativity? Who couldn't be happier with this team? :clap:

2258982.jpg
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,722
Liked Posts:
3,723
the royals are not a playoff team. to compare the cubs and royals is absolute craziness. It seems that you are grasping for anything to get your mind away from the negativity.


Sent from my Rotary Phone using Tapatalk

Royals finished 5.5 out in the wild card. I said they were, and I quote, "on the cusp of playoffs." Would it really be a surprise if they won 90 games next year after winning 86 this year? Also, why's it crazy to compare the two? The Royals were a team that built largely out of trades and their own draft picks. The past several years their FA's have been Jeremy Guthrie(3 years $25 mil), Jason Vargas(4 years $32 mil), Omar Infante(4 years $30 mil), Bruce Chen(2 years $9 mil), Jonathan Broxton(1 year $4 mil), Yuniesky Betancourt(1 year $2 mil), and Jose Mijares(1 year $925k). To suggest the 2016 cubs have a realistic shot at 86 wins isn't a stretch. You could even argue the cubs have the chance to do that sooner because they have more payroll to spend not to mention the fact most of those 9 Royal players have been a disappointment for what you would expect. Maybe the cubs fair better with their prospects.

But I guess because I'm not doing the popular thing of bitching and moaning that means I'm wrong. I'm frankly tired of many on this board who seemingly enjoy being miserable. Why shouldn't cub fans look forward to those prospects? It's not like I'm building them up to be something they aren't. This farm system will be very similar to a system considered one of the best ever at the time. And even if that system didn't work out as you would hope, it still produced an 86 win team. That's a team that's maybe 1-2 good players away from being a legit contender for the World Series. The Cards and the Sox were the best teams in their respective leagues and won 97 games. If the cubs were an 86 win team we can actually talk about adding a Cano type mattering as he is around a 6 WAR player.
 

Boobaby1

New member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2013
Posts:
2,236
Liked Posts:
1,180
Royals finished 5.5 out in the wild card. I said they were, and I quote, "on the cusp of playoffs." Would it really be a surprise if they won 90 games next year after winning 86 this year? Also, why's it crazy to compare the two? The Royals were a team that built largely out of trades and their own draft picks. The past several years their FA's have been Jeremy Guthrie(3 years $25 mil), Jason Vargas(4 years $32 mil), Omar Infante(4 years $30 mil), Bruce Chen(2 years $9 mil), Jonathan Broxton(1 year $4 mil), Yuniesky Betancourt(1 year $2 mil), and Jose Mijares(1 year $925k). To suggest the 2016 cubs have a realistic shot at 86 wins isn't a stretch. You could even argue the cubs have the chance to do that sooner because they have more payroll to spend not to mention the fact most of those 9 Royal players have been a disappointment for what you would expect. Maybe the cubs fair better with their prospects.

But I guess because I'm not doing the popular thing of bitching and moaning that means I'm wrong. I'm frankly tired of many on this board who seemingly enjoy being miserable. ]Why shouldn't cub fans look forward to those prospects? It's not like I'm building them up to be something they aren't. This farm system will be very similar to a system considered one of the best ever at the time. And even if that system didn't work out as you would hope, it still produced an 86 win team. That's a team that's maybe 1-2 good players away from being a legit contender for the World Series. The Cards and the Sox were the best teams in their respective leagues and won 97 games. If the cubs were an 86 win team we can actually talk about adding a Cano type mattering as he is around a 6 WAR player.

I do look forward to some of the prospects, but I am not going to hedge everything on the farm.

Before 86 wins, comes 76 wins. How do you suppose the Cubs are going to get to 76 wins , let alone 86 wins with what they are throwing out there now or even next year?

Realistically speaking, they won't be in a position to get a Cano type player until then, and with the talk of Shark being traded, Schierholtz, Castro, and whomever, they stand to get even weaker than they already are if that is possible.

If one of the two between Bryant and Baez becomes just mediocre and not All-Star caliber, the Cubs are in a world of hurt because that would make 3 players between one of them, Castro, and Rizzo who fall into the average player level.

You better hope and pray that Baez and Bryant are everything they are cracked up to be because the whole organization is pretty well riding on their shoulders if they are going to come close to competing in 2016.
 

Chris J

Chris Jelinek
Joined:
Jul 22, 2011
Posts:
609
Liked Posts:
139
Location:
Joliet
Why does everyone choose to ignore two of the most important things of an organization. Scouts and coaches. I don't care if you have a top 10 pick every single year, you have to have scouts to find the best player available and the coaches to develop those guys along the way.

The Cardinals produce talent all the time. Why? Because they have an outstanding staff from top to bottom. Their scouts find the best players for them to draft even though they are drafting 20th or later every year. Their coaches are simply better than other organizations because frankly the better coaches wind up in the better organizations.

Just because the Royals drafted high for a long time and those high draft picks are rated as high prospect doesn't mean anything. You have to develop and you have to scout. Do yourselves some research and look at the resumes of the Cubs scouts and the Royals scouts.

I bet you in Theo, Jed, and Jason's time in Boston together, they drafted better than Kansas City did. And the Red Sox STILL have one of teh best farm systems and a lot of those guys are Theo's draft picks.

And then you also have international signings. People overlook what the Cubs did this past season in the International pool. This is a HUGE area. I know it's overlooked because Jimenez and Torres are only 16 but Baseball America already has Eloy Jimenez for a top 10 Cubs prospect. And if the Cubs are winning by the time he turns 19 or 20 he becomes a very valuable piece. He could be a final piece to the team or could be a valuable trading asset to land the cubs a player they need.

For example, the Angels really needed some starting pitching, BOOM they traded Jean Segura to land Grineke. The Rangers feel that Profar is ready to be an everyday 2nd baseman, BOOM they trade Kinsler and bring in Fielder.

Segura and Profar were international signings.
 

Chris J

Chris Jelinek
Joined:
Jul 22, 2011
Posts:
609
Liked Posts:
139
Location:
Joliet
Here's a quick rundown on MLB.com's top 80 prospects. The list are guys that were International signings:

2. Oscar Tarveras
3. Miguel Sano
6. Xander Bogarets
13. Gregory Planco
26. Jorge Soler
27. Gary Sanchez
35. Yordano Ventura
40. Alen Hanson
47. Alberto Mondosei
53. Robert Osuna
56. Jorge Alfaro
71. Luis Sardinas
73. Miakel Franco
75. Hak-Ju-Lee
76. Luis Heredia
78. Rymer Liriano
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,722
Liked Posts:
3,723
Before 86 wins, comes 76 wins. How do you suppose the Cubs are going to get to 76 wins , let alone 86 wins with what they are throwing out there now or even next year?

Royals had 71 in 2011(year that they were highly touted), 72 in 2012 and then 86 last year. Since you asked I'll break down in detail what needs to happen.

2011 - KC scored 730 runs(6th in the AL) and gave up 762 runs(12th in the AL) -32 run differential.
2012 - KC scored 676 runs(12th in the AL) and gave up 746 runs(10th in the AL) -70 run differential.
2013 - KC scored 648 runs(11th in the AL) and gave up 601 runs(1st in the AL) +47 run differential.

2013 - CHC scored 602 runs(14th in the NL) and gave up 689 runs(10th in the NL) - 87 run differential.

Unsurprisingly, a run differential of around 0 basically makes you a .500 team. Arizona was -10 and was 81-81. LAA were 78-84 with a -4. The Yankees were 85-77 with a -21. Washington was 86-76 with a +30. Baltimore was 85-77 with a +36. So, realistically to get to the 86 win area the cubs probably need to be in the +30-50 range.

The league average in the NL last year was 649 scored and 655 given up for some perspective. Cubs starters gave up 463 runs(7th in NL). You basically had a 6 headed monster that was 2 starters last year. I'm going to count Baker Feldman and Villanueva as one starter who had 33 GS. That "starter" threw 196 IP was 8-13 gave up 93 runs(86 earned) for an ERA of 3.95. The second starter of the combined forces of Garza, Arrieta and Rusin started 33 games threw 189 IP was 12-9 gave up 78 runs(75 earned) for an ERA of 3.57.

That basically made your rotation look like this
Wood - 32 GS 200.0 IP 9-12 3.11 ERA with 73 runs(69 earned)
Garza/Arrieta/Russin - 33 GS 189 IP 12-9 3.57 ERA with 78 runs(75 earned)
Baker/Feldman/Villanueva - 33 GS 196 IP 8-13 3.95 ERA with 93 runs(86 earned)
Shark - 33 GS 213.2 IP 8-13 4.34 ERA with 109 runs(103 earned)
Jackson - 31 GS 175.1 IP 8-18 4.98 ERA with 110 runs(97 earned)

The question becomes how do you replace the Garza/Arrieta/Russin starter which probably equates to a decent #2 and the Baker/Feldman/Villanueva starter who is probably a #4. If you believe in Shark, he probably has the ability to replace the Garza/Arrieta/Russin starter next year in terms of production which makes sense as many consider him to have #2 potential. I tend to believe Wood is more like his Oliver projection of 3.82 ERA than the 3.11 ERA this past year which would make him a slightly better pitcher than the Baker/Feldman/Villanueva pticher. Again, not really surprising as he's probably a #3 tops. Jackson if he rebounds should easily be able to put up what Shark did and possibly even closer to what Wood will do. Yet again, not surprising as Jackson has been a #3/4 throughout his career.

So, for the sake of argument, let's call Shark/Wood/Jackson a #2/3/4. If you add that up you're talking something like 78 + 93 + 93 runs thus far giving them 264 runs against. To replicate last year's staff they would then need 2 pitchers to start roughly 32 games, pitch roughly 188 IP, go 9-15 with a 3.97 ERA giving up 92 runs(83 earned). Replicating that really shouldn't be hard. You could essentially gamble on Baker and Arroyo and you have a pretty good shot of matching the production they got out of their starters last year. Improving on it however would probably take a #2 caliber pitcher.

The cubs bullpen gave up 226 runs(12th in NL). The dodgers were a top 5 NL bullpen and gave up 198. Given that the cubs have actively tried to address that this season added with the fact they have numerous guys who are more interesting bullpen arms than starters(Strop and Vizcaino for example) it's not unreasonable to expect their bullpen to get to a top 5 NL bullpen soon. That is a difference of +28 runs. At this point with those assumptions, you're at -59 run differential. To see where they can improve offensively, look at the production they got out of various positions. This includes anyone who played there not just the primary person.

C - 68 runs 652 PAs
1B - 74 runs 703 PAs
2B - 55 runs 641 PAs
3B - 70 runs 662 PAs
SS - 59 runs 715 PAs
LF - 80 runs 686 PAs
CF - 72 runs 696 PAs
RF - 75 runs 670 PAs
DH - 7 runs 42 PAs
P - 21 runs 336 PAs
PH - 21 runs 276 PAs

Let's assume roughly 50 runs again out of DH, P, and PH. Let's assume 390 runs out of the infield(70 - C, 80 - 1B, 75 - 2B, 75 - SS, 90 - 3B). And let's assume they get 255 out of the outfield(85 - LF, 85 - CF, 85 - RF). That would give you 690 runs. If you then assume 661 against(689 - 28) that gives you a run differential of +29. The biggest question is how realistic is 690 runs out of the offense as I think most would concede they could get similar production out of their starters and that they could improve their bullpen that much. I think 50 runs out of DH, P, and PH is a pretty safe assumption. I feel like C, 1B, and SS are also fairly safe. C and 1B are +8 runs and if Rizzo's average rebounds he alone could probably swing that especially when you consider the #4 hitter hit .259 last year and the #5 hit .221. As for SS, Castro had 78 runs in 2012. So, that's all probably pretty safe.

At 2B, 3B, and the OF its totally dependent on prospects. I don't think projecting Alcantara to have 75 runs is that big of a stretch. 17 2B had qualified PAs last year. The #9 guy in that was Utley who had 73. So, that's basically suggesting Alcantara is an average 2B at the major league level. At 3B, 5 players had over 88 runs(Beltre, Machado, Donaldson, Longria and Cabrera). Having both Baez and Bryant looking like they could be that type of player I think that too is a fairly safe bet. Almora in general is probably the safest prospect the cubs have. And with his stellar contact rate I feel safe in assuming he'll be on base enough to score 85 runs a year.

However, the corner OF positions are probably iffy. For the sake of this I was assuming Soler in RF and Bryant in LF. If we go on the assumption that 1 of Baez/Bryant fails too meet expectations and the other takes 3B then 85 runs in LF might be difficult. It's probably prudent to assume one of Almora/Soler fails to meet expectations as well. 16 LFs had qualified PAs last year and the #8 guy had 77 runs. In RF, 23 had qualified PAs with the #12 guy having 79 runs. So, if say Bryant and Soler fail and the cubs have to find league average replacements for LF/RF you're probably talking about -14 runs from the 690 projection.

Objectively, 690 runs is maybe 10-15 runs optimistic. That in turn would mean to be an 86 win team they probably need to be slightly better with their starters than they were in 2013. So, if you assume one of Baez/Bryant make it at 3B, one of Soler/Almora make it in OF, Alcantara is a league average player in the next 2 year the team is likely at a +15-20 run differential. You would need to fill corner outfield spots. Nate McLouth had 76 runs last year and signed for 2 years $10.75 mil. Victorino signed a 3 year $39 mil deal and scored 82 runs last year. That means you're talking about around $20 mil in annual salary to fill slots if you fail to develop OF prospects. For the bullpen, they've likely already have the pieces they need to be much better. They might possibly need to add 1-2 more players at between $5-10 total annually.

As for starters, a lot depends on what they do with Shark and if he does in fact turn into a decent #2. If they can depend on Shark/Wood/Jackson to be a dependable #2/3/4 over the next three years the picture is a bit more clear. From there, you need to add another #2 type and preferably another starter who's close to a #3. Pierce Johnson, Ramirez, Hendricks and Arrieta are potential in house options that might fit the #3 build. Edwards is probably the only guy they currently have who looks to be able to fill the #2 and above slot. They are also obviously trying to get Tanaka for that as well. I've suggested they should look into Homer Bailey who would fill that as well.

That's how this cubs team can be an 86 win team in 2016. I'm assuming 2 of the big 4 fail to meet expectations, 1 becomes a star(Baez or Bryant), 1 is decent(Almora). I'm assuming Alcantara becomes an average MLB 2B. I'm assuming one of Johnson, Arrieta, Ramirez and Hendricks becomes a #4 that pitches like a #3. I'm assuming Castro rebounds to 2012 levels which is better than this year but still not his best year. I'm assuming Rizzo rebounds some and gets some help from the #4/5 hitters when some of the prospects start coming up. I'm assuming they have a good but not great bull pen. I'm assuming they Wood and Jackson are #3/4 level pitchers and that they either lock up Shark or replace him with another #2 starter. And lastly I'm assuming they find another pitcher who's at least a #2 starter. All of that is perfectly reasonable and perhaps on the pessimistic side considering they also have the #4 pick in the draft which I didn't even mention and the fact the only major piece I've suggested them adding was a #2 starter with lessor signings in the OF and bullpen. To put it another way, I'm counting on 1 star, 1 above average player, 1 average player and a #3ish starter out of their top 15 prospect of which 7-8 are likely to be in the top 100. The rest I'm assuming they can find in FA or via trades. I think that's about as conservative as you can realistically get.
 

SilenceS

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
21,672
Liked Posts:
9,485
Shit in one hand and wish in the other. See which one fills up first.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,722
Liked Posts:
3,723
Shit in one hand and wish in the other. See which one fills up first.

That's an attitude I just can't understand. What I outlined isn't unrealistic and as I've said it's potentially pessimistic to what could actually happen. If people really believe shit's worse than I outlined it then what's the point in even talking about the cubs for the next 3+ years? Surely there is something better people could be doing with their lives that's far less depressing. If having 8 of the top 100 prospects doesn't excite people then what's the point in even being a cubs fan? It's like some here are so used to being miserable that they don't know any other way and that goes as far as to wanting everyone else to be as miserable as them. Will all of those players become stars? No. Will the front office make all the moves you want. Of course not. That's life. Shit wont always go your way. If someone can't find anything about the cubs that makes them excited then I got some insight for them. That person whether they realize it or not isn't a cubs fan. Again, I'm not saying you have to agree with every decision but how many "fans" here have said anything positive about literally anything the cubs have done? I don't know. This turned into a bit of a rant but I really don't get how some consider themselves fans and then are so perpetually negative. Part of being the fan is being a homer. I'd consider myself slightly optimistic in most cases rather than the full blown kool-aid drinking but if people want to drink the kool-aid why the hell not?
 

SilenceS

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
21,672
Liked Posts:
9,485
It also people's right to be upset. To predict a baseball lineup 3 years from now is useless. All 4 could bust and someone could jump up. Yet again, numbers only go so far. I've been a cubs and saints fan my whole life. I've seen losing forever. I'm not worked up. I just don't by into anything when there is nothing of a clear picture
 

SilenceS

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
21,672
Liked Posts:
9,485
Also, I don't consider how people act on a message board being what they are like in life. Makes all kinds to make the world spin. Just because they bitch doesn't make them less of a fanthen you
 

Boobaby1

New member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2013
Posts:
2,236
Liked Posts:
1,180
That's an attitude I just can't understand. What I outlined isn't unrealistic and as I've said it's potentially pessimistic to what could actually happen. If people really believe shit's worse than I outlined it then what's the point in even talking about the cubs for the next 3+ years? Surely there is something better people could be doing with their lives that's far less depressing. If having 8 of the top 100 prospects doesn't excite people then what's the point in even being a cubs fan? It's like some here are so used to being miserable that they don't know any other way and that goes as far as to wanting everyone else to be as miserable as them. Will all of those players become stars? No. Will the front office make all the moves you want. Of course not. That's life. Shit wont always go your way. If someone can't find anything about the cubs that makes them excited then I got some insight for them. That person whether they realize it or not isn't a cubs fan. Again, I'm not saying you have to agree with every decision but how many "fans" here have said anything positive about literally anything the cubs have done? I don't know. This turned into a bit of a rant but I really don't get how some consider themselves fans and then are so perpetually negative. Part of being the fan is being a homer. I'd consider myself slightly optimistic in most cases rather than the full blown kool-aid drinking but if people want to drink the kool-aid why the hell not?

Okay, so lets be optimistic that it is January 15th, the Cubs had one of the worst offensive teams in all of baseball, and they have added Justin Ruggiano to aid in that area which is also a platoon player. Is this another year of sitting back and assessing? The brass was suppose to do that in year one, and they have traded most of the assets away. What's to assess? They stink to high heaven.

Furthermore, you haven't paid attention to what you are calling as people being completely negative all of the time when in fact, I have stated that I gave the farm an "A" grade a while back, but think it's time to start making the "D+" grade I give the parent club to start moving that upwards and not solely relying on the farm.

I am not going to be convinced that Junior Lake is a better option than Soriano in LF regardless if he becomes a utility player for the Cubs in a couple of years because numbers show that he would have struck out as much as, if not more than Soriano, and he is not a clean-up hitter which at least Soriano could do. His OBP means squat to me, and he hasn't played a full year yet where pitchers could exploit his weaknesses. His numbers are not something to go by either, because if you remember, he started off on fire so to see his numbers at the end, means he was resorting back to the true Junior Lake.

I have also said that I wanted Tanaka only this year because he is all about the team moving forward. Never once did I say I wanted Cano or Elsbury, and only last year during early summer, I said Choo might be a good fit to play CF. I have then changed my stance.

Am I excited about what's in the farm? Sure. Am I disappointed about what's playing at Wrigley Field this year and the past two seasons? Most definitely, and frankly, I would be more worried about the current players pessimistic attitudes rather than a few fans on CCS.

If the front office can't convince all of the players to get on board with their plan, not sure how they are going to convince the fans.

I know winning cures everything, but the only difference between all of these Cubs fans on CCS and abroad which is where the pessimism and optimism come into play is that some feel it's time to start doing it, while others have more patience and can wait years upon years to do so.

So, who is wrong? :popcorn:
 

Jntg4

Fire Forum Moderator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
26,017
Liked Posts:
3,297
Location:
Minnesota
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  2. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Chicago State Cougars
  2. DePaul Blue Demons
  3. Illinois-Chicago Flames
  4. Loyola Ramblers
  5. Northern Illinois Huskies
  6. Northwestern Wildcats
Why does everyone choose to ignore two of the most important things of an organization. Scouts and coaches. I don't care if you have a top 10 pick every single year, you have to have scouts to find the best player available and the coaches to develop those guys along the way.

The Cardinals produce talent all the time. Why? Because they have an outstanding staff from top to bottom. Their scouts find the best players for them to draft even though they are drafting 20th or later every year. Their coaches are simply better than other organizations because frankly the better coaches wind up in the better organizations.

Just because the Royals drafted high for a long time and those high draft picks are rated as high prospect doesn't mean anything. You have to develop and you have to scout. Do yourselves some research and look at the resumes of the Cubs scouts and the Royals scouts.

I bet you in Theo, Jed, and Jason's time in Boston together, they drafted better than Kansas City did. And the Red Sox STILL have one of teh best farm systems and a lot of those guys are Theo's draft picks.

And then you also have international signings. People overlook what the Cubs did this past season in the International pool. This is a HUGE area. I know it's overlooked because Jimenez and Torres are only 16 but Baseball America already has Eloy Jimenez for a top 10 Cubs prospect. And if the Cubs are winning by the time he turns 19 or 20 he becomes a very valuable piece. He could be a final piece to the team or could be a valuable trading asset to land the cubs a player they need.

For example, the Angels really needed some starting pitching, BOOM they traded Jean Segura to land Grineke. The Rangers feel that Profar is ready to be an everyday 2nd baseman, BOOM they trade Kinsler and bring in Fielder.

Segura and Profar were international signings.

They actually do not have Jimenez in their Top 10...
http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/2014-chicago-cubs-top-10-prospects/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top