Advertisement:

10 question MLB Draft Reader Poll: Narrowing down preferences

10 question MLB Draft Reader Poll: Narrowing down preferences

I've written a ton about the MLB Draft, including info from my own sources and some from the stuff you can readily find online from national writers like Keith Law, Baseball America, Jim Callis, and Jonathan Mayo and smaller sites such as Chris Crawford's MLB Draft Insider, Big League Futures, and Dan Kirby's Through The Fence Baseball.

I've watched games and have seen a lot of early round players, including those that the Cubs might draft. But my homework is largely done.

I have exhausted all the public and inside information available on all the candidates and now, with scouts turning in their final reports, the process of making a final decision begins.

For our purposes, now that we have inundated you with information, you can play the scouts role of turning in your final decisions for the Cubs 4th pick.  I have set up 10 poll questions to help us narrow down the choices...

General Preferences

Okay, now let's get down to the individual player preferences by category.

We will start with the pitchers...

And now the position players...

And one miscellaneous question...

Filed under: 2014 MLB Draft, polls

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Pretty much went best player available. The college bat I prefer is Zimmer though

  • In reply to Javier Bryant:

    I hear you-- best all-around college player-- but it seems that he's out for the #4 pick -- and may drop down into the teens. If you like all around player though, I'd go with Pentecost, can hit for average and play good D at a premium position.

  • My own personal top 5 would be:
    Aiken
    Rodon
    Kolek
    Nola
    Jackson

  • Personally I'd be happy with whoever is left of the three pitchers.

    If they go 1-2-3 then I'm perfectly happy with Jackson. Adding the best bat in the draft for the second year in a row works for me.

    I'd love if the Cubs were able to get Rodon.

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    I'd suspect a lot of people agree with you from the looks of this poll.

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    I'm with you. If Jackson just has a chance at sticking at catcher, he'd be my guy if the top 3 pitchers are gone. I'm a Castillo fan, but the Cubs need someone behind Castillo just in case.

  • In reply to Tinker Evers Chance:

    Jackson has a chance to stick at catcher, from what I am told. One thing to consider -- he will move a lot quicker as an outfielder.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Or 3B?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Tinker Evers Chance:

    And you are OK knowing that Jackson - even if he pans out - likely won't have much of an impact before 2020? That's my issue with drafting high school guys so high at this point.

  • In reply to Gregory Shriver:

    Yup! Pitchers can be even more of a crap shoot. Quality catchers who can hit don't come along very often.

    By 2020 Castillo will likely be declining, if not before. Jackson will be what? 24? All of the draft is a gamble.

  • fb_avatar

    Is under slot just another term for reaching for a player (aka NFL)? Forgive me for being a noob! :)

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    Yes, though in baseball, unlike the NFL, 1st round talents can and do slip into the later rounds because of signability issues.

    An example is pitcher Jacob Bukauskus, who is a mid first rounder on talent but is heavily committed to Virginia. The Cubs could take Pentecost, save a million and then spend $2M to try to talk him out of college. They'd get two mid first round talents this way in Pentecost and Bukauskus.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Couldn't the Cubs also take whoever they want at 4, and then offer whoever they take in the 2nd round an overslot and just spend less in the later rounds?

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    Yep. That is an option and it'd be a tough decision.

    You always have some leverage because you can always pay more than the next team can, even if you go less than slot. Theoretically you can calculate the exact amount the next team can offer at a maximum, and then offer a $1 above that amount, making that the best offer that player can possibly get.

    A deeper question is how far down to you want to go. A guy like Max Pentecost may not go until the 10th pick and so even at a significant underslot deal, he would make a lot more money if the Cubs drafted him. Meanwhile, the Cubs save a lot of money to go after a 1st round talent in the second round (i.e. hard throwing HS RHP Jake Bukauskus)

    Alternatively, the Cubs could go for someome like Nola, who may just go 5th. They'll get a highr rated player but they may not save enough money to get someone like Bukauskus.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Are there any recent examples of a team going the underslot route and it bites them in the butt when the 2nd round pick doesn't sign? Due to them being dead set on going to college or returning for his senior year?

    The underslot route seems a bit risky for my taste.

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    Not since the new CBA went into effect but there is a small sample size on that. Before CBA, there was a lot of overslot potential, but nobody had to save money on first round pick unless they wanted to,

    My guess is that the Cubs would call Bukauskus before they pick and ask if he'll sign for x amount. If not, they go to the next guy.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    In example of a team choosing to save money early to go big later before the new CBA was actually the Cubs. Tyler Colvin-Jeff Samardzija draft. Samardzija was going to require 1st round money to buy him out of an NFL future and they he would still be there in the 4th (The Cubs did not possess 2nd or 3rd round picks that season because of FA signings). So they took Colvin (I think he was considered to be a 2nd round talent by most teams) in the 1st to save some dough for Shark.

  • In reply to mjvz:

    Yes, they also did it with Hayden Simpson and Matt Szczur.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    I'm getting dizzy!

  • In reply to 44slug:

    LOL!

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    Going underslot is in a way reaching for a player because you are choosing a player that is not really worth the spot he is being drafted. However, the difference between baseball and football is that there is a cap in baseball on the amount of money a team can spend throughout the draft and also you are choosing from a much larger and less physically developed pool of players (HS kids). By going underslot, you spend less money on your first round pick but that allows you to reallocate the money to later picks so that you can go overslot and potentially give a couple of HS kids enough money to convince them to bypass that opportunity at a college scholarship.

  • While I completely get the BPA idea,.... by hook or crook - the Cubs need to start squirreling away the potential TOR pitchers. That's the biggest gap in the system top to bottom.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to drkazmd65:

    Exactly. You can trade for middle rotation pitching from a surplus of position players, but TOR rarely change hands. We need to start addressing that through draft/IFA

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Zonk:

    This is why I'm starting to wonder if the Cubs can afford to let Samardzija walk, unless they get offered the likes of Stroman and Sanchez from the Jays (and I still don't see any MLB-ready TOR-type guys coming in return for Shark).

    But if they give Shark what he wants, then you are a Max Scherzer signing away from solving your TOR issues. Or if Shark walks, maybe you sign Scherzer and give James Shields a fat four-year deal (a little risky since he is a bit older).

    Without a big free agent signing, if you deal Shark, you are looking at pushing back the timetable for contending in my opinion.

  • In reply to drkazmd65:

    If we consider there are 3 TOR potential players, and one was available at #4, would he not be the BPA? I would rather have the #1 daily player than the 4th pitcher who may not be consider a TOR guy.

  • In reply to Missed Signal:

    Yes, it will work itself out this year.

  • In reply to Missed Signal:

    That would be my point MS - But if all 3 of those potential TOR guys are gone (it could happen),.... then if you take the BPA left who is an everyday position player,....

    You gotta go and spend some big money, or make a big trade, and get that TOR guy somewhere else.

    Like Gregory said - if you don't get that TOR guy via the draft this year (assuming he makes it to Wrigley in 2-3 years) AND you don't try to keep Samardzija,..... who, let's face it is pitching like a TOR guy so far this season,..... you gotta roll the dice or spend some money.

  • fb_avatar

    The underslot thing is such a tough call. If they decide to go underslot, I'd hope they'd go way underslot so they're in position to grab this year's Sean Manaea who slips through the cracks. (And get a good player like Pentecost or Conforto in the deal.) However, if they'd tried that last year they would have been sad out of luck because the Royals beat them to the punch. Justus Sheffield could be a fallback option there, though, and not a terrible booby prize.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Sheffield, Bukauskus are two guys I would target along with Fedde (Hoffman won't be there). One should be available. Another guy is Sean-Reid Foley.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Too many teams with multiple first round picks and/or picks in the competitive balance round for a guy like Hoffman or Fedde to drop to the Cubs second round pick. I don't even think a guy like Bukauskus will be available.

  • In reply to mjvz:

    Bukauskus may not get drafted at all in the 2nd round because his demands are so, so high. I think you need at least $2M to have a shot and not many teams will be able to get that much saved.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    That's good to know. I figured with Houston potentially going underslot again, and teams like Pit and Tor having multiple picks, as well as a team like the Cards have comp balance picks some team would take the chance that on him at 2M. Maybe he just isn't worth it.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Moody:

    If Rodon is not available, I like the idea of going way underslot. I just don't like the idea of picking a high school player near the top of the draft because I'm looking for someone who can help speed up the timetable for the Cubs to contend.

    I like the idea of drafting high school players higher once you already have a contending team in place and you are looking to build depth for the future.

  • I get the underslot theory, I totally do, but I wouldn't do it at #4.

    I wouldn't pass on a player I think is better for another that is willing to accept less money, even if it means having more money to spend in later rounds. The 1st round is your best chance to get the impact star.

    Now it's fair game if he's he BPA on your board and you think he'll sign for underslot.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    Normally I'd agree with this but, this year, there are questions about everyone at the top and a lot of questions outside of the big 3 pitchers. Going for numbers might be the best approach in the -- sadly likely -- event that all 3 of the pitchers are gone when the Cubs pick.

    Stupid White Sox sweep.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Haha, the Crosstown Cup sweep!

    Who would be your Top 5? Regardless of signability issues?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    This has admittedly changed about 50 times in the last month:

    1) Rodon -- The velo drop scares the hell out of me but he could move very quickly and has a nice floor as a middle of the order starter.
    2) Kolek -- Go with consistent velocity and the highest ceiling in this draft. (His ceiling is Roger Clemens without the juice so, essentially, you could be drafting one of the 10 best pitchers who ever lived here.)
    3) Aiken -- I get the arguments for him but pitchers who find velocity the year of the draft scare me. (See: Zastryzny, Rob.)
    4) Gordon -- Excellent athlete, can stick at a premium position with slick fielding and a cannon arm, good approach from the left side. I like the reports I've heard on his bat. He seems to have four tools for sure with potential for five with his power.
    5) Jackson -- Can't teach raw power.

    How about you?

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Mine would be Rodon, Aiken, Kolek, Jackson, and Gordon.

    Kolek's secondary pitches scare me off of him. Jackson, regardless of position, is worth more to me than Gordon, particularly with how people are all over the board on his hit tool. Aiken's uptick in velo is not a one-game thing, but appears to be all year long. Plus, I would give the nod to a lefty over a righty no matter what. If Hoffman were healthy, he would be No. 5 on my list.

  • In reply to JB88:

    One thing to remember regarding Kolekl, Nolan Ryan only threw a FB and CU and made it to the bigs at age 20, though he didnt become HOF type Nolan until he developed his CB with the Angels. Maybe Koleks HS coach is actually looking out for him and telling him not to throw breaking balls at a young age. Id take Kolek if hes there based on his potential Clemens-like ceiling. We pay Derek Johnson to teach our young arms. Why not give him one of the best?

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    1. Rodon- I like the track record. Three straight 1st team all-ACC selections. Someone who could help the Cubs in the very near future (2016?)

    2/3. Aiken/Kolek- one is the hard thrower, one is the better pitcher. I have never seen either play so I have zero idea. But by reading great sites like this one I'm able to grasp that they're both special. HS pitchers are the biggest crap shoots. I don't prefer one over the other. Gun to my head...Kolek...can't teach velocity. This has Manning/Leaf written all over it, where in 10 years we say something like "I can't believe Kolek was considered that high" (or the other way around)

    4. Jackson- best bat. It doesn't matter to me if he sticks at catcher. If he can hit I'm sure we'll find a place.

    5. Gordon- I have Jackson above him because he popped into Top 5 territory very recently. I like the potential versatility and the bloodlines.

    I'd be disappointed in we don't get any of those 5.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Moody:

    1.) Rodon- Even though this year has been somewhat of a disappointment, he has still shown flashes of the old Rodon from the past two years.
    2.) Kolek- It really is a toss up with him and Aiken, both have thier pros and cons.
    3.) Aiken- The only reason I have him after Kolek is because high school pitchers with good secondaries scare the hell out of me with all these TJS.
    4.) Jackson- Don't care if he sticks at catcher or moves to the OF, his power and hit tool are still ok with me.
    5.) Gordon- Love his speed, defense, and lefty bat but I heard scouts aren't completely sold on his hit tool and power.

    I'm on the same page as Jimmy, I don't want anyone but those 5.

  • In reply to gas34:

    I'm gonna chime in here with my top 5.
    1) Rodon- Still feel he's the best player in the draft
    2) Aiken
    3) Jackson
    4) Kolek
    5) Gordon.

    I really don't have a huge reason as to why I like Jackson better than Kolek, I just do.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Javier Bryant:

    I'm extremely high on Jackson as well, and if they did pick Jackson over Kolek I wouldn't be mad at all. I'm a huge fan of going position player 1 then a stockpile of pitchers after that.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    My guess is:
    1. Aiken
    2. Jackson
    3. Rodon
    Then at 4, I have to trust the FO will have done as much research on health, mechanics, stress, projection on Kolek to weigh the risk of breakdown. If they think the risk is high due to his unbelievable FB MPH, then they go Gordon. If they think he is an exception to all the rules DR's are saying about TJ risks, then they take a stab at his TOR arm. Either way, I think we get quality. At 5, I think Royals go Nola or Conforto. This is fun to do, but, of course, we know nothing of the real info the FO has on all these guys. Would love to be in those meetings!

  • In reply to Missed Signal:

    I would be happy if our FO had their choice of Kolek and Gordon. I would guess they would go Kolek. 102 mph FB doesn't happen too often.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    I still say, given the questions regarding the big 3 arms, that one of the top 3 teams will choose the underslot approach or just take Jackson because they think he may be a better player. I am confident that one of the big 3 will be available when the Cubs pick.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to mjvz:

    It's definitely possible and I'm hopeful, too, but I remember how much we wanted to believe that Appel would fall to us last year (thank God we don't always get what we want). I'm moderating my expectations a bit.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Last year I wasn't wooried at all because I knew there was no way we weren't going to get a really high ceiling player. Appel, Bryant and Gray were all big time prospects. This year, even the top guys (although Aiken appears to be pretty 'clean') have questions that last year's guys didn't have. Even if a guy like Rodon falls to the Cubs, I'll be excited, but I will moderating my expectations for the player. I expected Bryant to be really good, really fast. I won't have those same expectations this year. I wouldn't even have them if we were picking second again. Just a different draft, with different caliber of players at the top.

  • In reply to mjvz:

    Isn't it funny, if I recall correctly, they were saying last years draft wasn't a strong one compared to this year, but there also was no way Rondon wasnt going 1.1

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    I agree. If you have a clear preference at #4, go get him.

    Only way I do underslot is if I'm not sure between 3-5 players, then maybe talk to them all and see who will sign for the least.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    John, what does the top of the draft look like for 2015? Couldn't the Cubs lowball their No. 1 pick and get a replacement pick at the top of next year's draft along with their regular 2015 pick?

  • In reply to Gregory Shriver:

    Even if you could predict that there would be 5 (the Cubs replacement would be the 5th pick next year) players better than the guys available at 4 this year, you couldn't count on them all being healthy (see: Jeff Hoffman, Eric Fedde).

  • In reply to Gregory Shriver:

    It's not better, not in least in terms of pitching. This year is the year to stock up on arms and they don't want to lose that pool money if they can go underslot.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    But if one of the top three pitchers isn't available, from what I read, it looks like a bit of a dropoff at the No. 4 pick. Seems like from there on the draft is more about depth than high ceiling talent - in which case I like the overslot strategy.

  • fb_avatar

    I keep spinning this around in my head. It comes down to this for me. There's nothing close to a sure thing in this draft, at least there shouldn't be a 4th overall. This is one draft where I think the Cubs may be well be better off using the underslot strategy on a player like Conforto.

    I still don't see this front office taking a high school pitcher 4th overall. So unless Rodon drops to the Cubs, I think it will be a position player if the Cubs go BPA. My pick in that instance is unequivocally Gordon. My reason for him over Jackson is that I think he has both the higher ceiling and the higher floor because of the position he plays, he hits left-handed, he has the fallback of being moved to the mound, and Jackson is not likely to stay at Catcher.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    All very rational. Hard to argue.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Michael, you put forth a pretty convincing argument. My gut is saying Cubs get Gordon, unless the White Sox snap him first, as has been suggested by some sources.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Denizen Kane:

    I actually heard an interview over the weekend that Nick Gordon did with MLBNR's Grant Paulsen. He seems well polished in terms of his interviewing skills. You'd have thought he was a ML veteran. His dad has schooled him well. I also got the impression that he is hoping the Cubs will draft him.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    What made you think he wanted the Cubs to draft him?

  • With the 4th pick go for the best player available not time to play
    games trying to save money in order to a better pick in the 2nd round

  • In reply to emartinezjr:

    I agree. I think there is enough talent at #4 to simply go BPA.

  • I'm just not seeing a scenario where Rodon doesn't fall to the Cubs at 4, and I think that makes Jedstein's choice pretty easy. I'm concerned about the workload and poorer performance this year, but you can't pass on a LHP that was the consensus #1 in the draft as recently as two months ago.

    Rodon. If he's not there for 4, the only reason he isn't is because Jackson is still available, and I can live with that as the consolation prize.

  • If they are going to go underslot at No. 4, I'd almost rather they draft Hoffman and try to *cough* arrange something in advance to sign him way under slot. I'd rather have a TOR arm who deserved to be a top 4 pick before injury than someone else.

    But, that said, I'll be really PO'd if they go under slot at No. 4. Especially as often as this FO has espoused the BPA philosophy for drafting.

  • In reply to JB88:

    I didn't add Hoffman because unless I'm getting a lot of smoke blown my way, he is not on the Cubs board.

  • I wouldn't mind them going the under slot route. But If they know now that is the route they are going then they should trade for a CB pick and really make it worth it.

  • In reply to Holy Cattle:

    I like that line of thinking...*if* you are going to go underslot, go big and stack up on first round talent.

  • It's going to be BPA no matter what because that's how the FO operates, but it's fun to speculate on the order of their board. I know it won't happen, but I'd still draft Hoffman at 1.4 because he's got the highest ceiling of any player available there and he could probably be had for underslot. You would just need to temper expectations on his development and arrival time.

    I'm not sure why, but I want to stay away from Jackson. His bat isn't as special as someone like Wil Myers who made the catcher to RF conversion and I'm not sure he's worth the 4th pick. Plus, I've seen comments about his weight that worry me and some hints about his attitude/work ethic. I'd rather go with Gordon or Beede, but I'm starting to get hopeful that Kolek falls to #4.

  • In reply to North Side Irish:

    Good stuff. Some really good points of view from everyone today. Really liking this comment board!

  • Anybody else keeping track of this crazy NC State game?

    Must win for them to have any shot at the tournament. I would love to see Rodon pitch at Super Regionals after the Cubs draft him.

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    No thanks. If the Cubs draft him I would rather he not touch the ball for a college coach with nothing invested in Rodon's future. That sounds like the makings of a 150 pitch game.

  • In reply to mjvz:

    I was never a big believer of pitch counts doing great harm.
    When I was growing up 150 pitches wasn't out of the norm. Leo Mazzone, probably the best pitching coach ever hates pitch counts.

    Babying the kids nowadays is not helping with the TJ epidemic. Things are getting worse.

    Wolfpack fall 4-3. Had runners on 2nd and 3rd with 0 outs in the 8th and couldn't score.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    when we were growing up, guys didn't throw 97mph fb's with 91 mph wipeout sliders either. Steve Stone stated that the year he won his CY, the average MLB fastball was 83 MPH. Couple that with the mound lower than it was in the days of Koufax and drysdale, thus changing the trajectory and leverage and you have all the makings of added stress to the arm.

  • In reply to Mike Partipilo:

    Nolan Ryan threw that fast.

    I'm going to side with Mazzone. He knows more than Stone IMO.

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    There are always going to be freaks of nature that never get hurt and pitch forever. Ryan, Maddux, Paige, etc. Outliers hold little value. That is why they often dropped from statistical analysis.

  • In reply to mjvz:

    Ryan is just one example. There were plenty of hard throwers back then.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    Not nearly as many as there are now, as proven by statistical evidence. Most guys threw in the 80's. That's no lie. Now instead of one or two guys on a staff topping 90 with regularity, pretty much everyone does. Even just 20 years ago, let alone 40, NO TEAM had six or seven guys in the 94-96 range, but now EVERY team does

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    There's definitely more now but as pertains to pitch counts, where this conversation started as, there's not many starters that throw 97 at a consistent basis as your original point stated.

    The average starter is in the low to mid-90's. The top end guys from back then sat there too.

    Difference is back then they didn't arm as many arm problems as now, not even close. Let's not pretend guys didn't touch 90+ back then even if the average was less.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    You're not just siding with Mazzone over Stone, you've siding with him over every pitching coach I know of in the modern game as well as significant medical and statistical evidence that pitch count does matter.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    I think we know my next request...

    Show me the medical data about pitch counts.

    Here's something less than a month old.

    http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/2043472-pitch-counts-are-good-for-kids-bad-for-major-leaguers

    "While their research showed that there is increasing risk, there was no clear correlation to injury."

    I'm sure you can find something. There's people on both sides of the equation. Doesn't make either of us right or wrong.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    Let me ask it this way: what evidence would you need to see to convince you that pitch counts do have a negative impact on pitcher health?

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    And as far as "every" pitching coach of the modern era, that has to be false.

    If they want a job they are going to abide by organizational rules, doesn't mean they are in favor of pitch counts. They are in favor of staying employed.

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    Here's some more stuff.

    http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/1622573-do-innings-limits-pitch-counts-actually-prevent-serious-injuries

    Bleacher Report isn't the world leader on medicine, I know, but there's a lot of good links in there. Very recent information.

    I don't think that these links make me right, I have my believe system that you won't be able to change and I'm not trying to change your mind, but let's not act like this is a "did dinosaurs exist?" argument where there's only one side of the equation. There's a second side, you don't have to agree with it but it does exist, your side isn't as overwhelming as you think.

    Now go ahead and post your google search articles and tell me why you're right.

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    If I'm not mistaken, ex- White Sox player Carl Everett did not believe that dinosaurs existed :)

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    *belief system

  • In reply to Mike Partipilo:

    I'd also like to know where Steve Stone got that data, I didn't know records kept were that thorough back then for pitch speeds.

  • In reply to Mike Partipilo:

    Mike, Stone always has said it was his wipeout CB and his throwing it 70% of the time in his CY year of 1980 that ruined his arm. He even admitted knowing it would, he felt the chance to have a big season was worth the likely damage he was doing to his arm. The one thing you did point out was the lowering of the mound. That might be the single largest culprit in the rash of arm surgeries, when you consider guys have to throw across there bodies more often to get the proper trajectory on there pitches. Maybe MLB might want to consider looking into that.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    I don't agree with the lowering of the mound being a huge issue.

    The change happened 45 years ago, the TJ epidemic is pretty recent.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    Because now you are combining that factor with bigger stronger pitchers and PED's

  • In reply to Mike Partipilo:

    How percentage of pitchers do you think are on PED's? It has to be a high number if you're including it as reasoning on why there is an epidemic.

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    * What percentage, ugh, fat fingers, small keyboard.

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    Obviously no one knows the answer to this problem, otherwise it wouldn't be a problem. Like most things, it probably isn't from one cause, but some combination of a many.

    Re: pitch counts.

    I'm not very old, but even when I was a kid, players were not throwing this hard. You go back to even 1990 and I bet there was maybe a couple of guys capable of touching 100 and then a small group of guys capable of throwing upper 90s. Now every team has multiple guys in their bullpen that throw 95+.

    There is no holding back anymore and saving bullets for the best hitters or for when you get into tough situations. That used to be a thing. Now, it is all out, all the time, or they potentially cost themselves millions of dollars or maybe even their job. It is just a different and more competitive game now. Its global, so there are more guys fighting for a limited number of jobs.

  • In reply to mjvz:

    There's a quote in this article about why the bullets theory is a flawed one.

    http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/2043472-pitch-counts-are-good-for-kids-bad-for-major-leaguers

    "The other thing is—this is a big concept that people are overlooking—the arm, the elbow, the shoulder of any of these pitchers—these are living people, they’re not pieces of metal or plastic or whatever. So you can’t just count things up. In other words, you’ve heard the analogy: people say ‘You have so many bullets, and you don’t shoot all your bullets,’ you shouldn’t always just blow it on one game or season or this or this or that. That analogy works with bullets, because if you had a case of bullets and you shot them all, you would be out. But an arm, or pitches in an arm, is not a proper analogy, because a pitcher doesn’t have a certain number of throws in his arm. That’s true because pitchers are living, breathing, and their arm is repairing. The arm is breaking down and repairing."

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    My greater point was that pitch counts now may not correalate to pitch counts from earlier eras.

    I think the idea of throwing 150 pitches at say 95% of capability and then mixing in a few at 100% probably has less chance of injury than throwing 100 pitches at 100% with maybe a few 95% mixed in. I think the fact that pitchers are maxing out all the time now has more to do with it then the actual number of pitches in a single outing.

    Also, most guys do not rely on a 4 seam fastball anymore which may also plays into it a little. When guys throw 2 seamers and cutters they are putting different stresses on their fingers/grips which may translate to greater stress on the elbow than a straight 4 seamer. These fastball variations can in essence be considered "mini" breaking balls. These types of pitches were far more rare even 20 years ago. So again, modern day pitch counts may not correalate exactly to previous era pitch counts.

  • In reply to mjvz:

    I definitely don't think modern pitchers are maxing out all of the time. Don't you ever notice that guys who move from the rotation to the pen have higher velocities in relief?

    That's because then they are maxing out.

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    2nd and 3rd with no outs and couldn't score?? Sounds like future Cubs? :: tongue firmly in cheek ::

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    If the Cubs do draft Rodon, I would prefer NC State to not make the playoffs. I don't want him pitching any more very high pitch-count games.

  • In reply to Cphil:

    Agreed!

  • fb_avatar

    The other thing to keep in mind with the underslot option is that the Astros will almost certainly save some money on the Aiken signing (how much depends on whether the Marlins would take him if the Astros don't and how hardball Aiken's "advisors" are willing to be) and will have first shot at anyone who slips.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Good point, I can see the Marlins also going underslot to have the 2nd crack.

    And I guess couldn't the Sox go underslot too?

    So 4th crack for us? Again... :p

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    You (and others) have stated Astros will save money with Aiken much like Correa. I am intrigued though...was Correa considered the top pick in the draft, like Aiken now is becoming? Is the underslot mainly the difference between the 1st slot and, say, the 3rd slot?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to springs:

    He was Top 10 but not the top player -- best player was between Mark Appel and Byron Buxton. If Buxton can stay healthy, he looks like he is going to make Houston regret that one for a very long time.

  • Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 2m
    Sources: #RedSox sign Drew.

    I believe this removes one possibility of the Cubs second round pick dropping even further.

  • In reply to North Side Irish:

    Why didn't they wait a couple of weeks?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    He's their free agent -- they don't lose a pick.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Oh, that's right. I forgot he was with the Red Sox!

    Brain cramp.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    1) They could really use him.
    2) No team was going to sign him before the draft so they weren't getting the comp pick anyway.
    3) Maybe he told them he would sign for a little less if they brought him in now so that he could have a little extra time to build his value back up for FA next year.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to North Side Irish:

    This is so telling. They want until it's abundantly clear they aren't getting a pick for him and then bring him back.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Exactly. These comp picks were intended to help the "small market teams" get compensation for losing good players. Instead, it's just the Red Sox and Yankees making QOs to everyone and stockpiling picks.

  • In reply to North Side Irish:

    First let me say the comp picks tied to FA is stupid.

    It isn't meant to help small market teams by giving them picks though, it is meant to depress FA prices in general. It doesn't effect the high end guys, but the mid market guys, that without comp pick attached, who would get 3-5/30-50M+ deals are getting stuck with the 1 yr QO or finding their market depressed.

    Royals got a pick for Santana, Indians for what's his name, etc. So if that is what the goal of it is, then it is helping them, but it just helps the big market teams just as much. It hurts players. That is all it does, that is what it is for.

  • In reply to North Side Irish:

    I believe Kendrys Morales is the only other unsigned pick with compensation attached, right? And it doesn't seem likely that he's going to sign in the next three weeks.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to North Side Irish:

    Some offensively challenged team will probably sign him the day after the draft.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Hey, I can think of at least one offensively challenged team. But the Cubs don't really need a DH all that badly.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to North Side Irish:

    Interesting fallout there, though, because Morales didn't sign the Mariners now lose their second round pick for signing Cano.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to North Side Irish:

    Stephen Drew = last kid picked in dodgeball

    Poor guy.

  • May mean nothing but an interesting development in that teams in the 6-10 range are calling on Trea Turner (per Ken Rosenthal).

    That tells me Gordon is going top 5.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Is that really saying that much, though? I thought MN was seen as a lock to take Gordon if he was there at 1.5.

  • In reply to JB88:

    He is not a lock at 5. They also like Jackson and Nola.

  • If we are in a situation to go underslot, I think the Cubs should take a shot at a high upside prospect like Newcomb. If he had put it together with control this year, he might be in discussion for the top 5. Getting him underslot and then using that money later to enhance other picks could lead to a strong top 10.

  • Why does Jackson seem to be a White Sox kind-of guy to me? I think someone will try to underslot out of the top 3. You could argue that Houston did the last two years considering Appel was a Sr. and could hardly argue much even with Boras as an agent. I'm not sure any of the top 3 pitching prospects would be happy under slot, but I'd take any of them. I guess Aiken is at the top of my list but only the wear on an older arm makes me pick him over Rodon. Hard. Really hard to not take the 103 MPH arm from Texas, but the better secondaries push the lefty's past him for me. If there are any issues with Jackson (I like the power) Gordon would be fine with me as well.

    If they are to go underslot I'd say I like Pentecost's floor and positional value and trading with someone for their CB pick may be the ticket for this route.

  • Have/Would a baseball exec (theo) trade down similar to NFL?? Attack the pitching situation again through numbers. Seems like this could be the draft to do it.

  • In reply to svelocity:

    Can't trade normal draft picks only competitive balance picks.

  • In reply to svelocity:

    Can't trade draft picks in the MLB draft. (Well you can trade competitive balance picks....but that's not something the Cubs can do).

    If it was allowed would an exec do it? I'd imagine it would happen from time to time.

  • In reply to MIcubsfan:

    Thanks guys!

  • In reply to svelocity:

    Absolutely. I was hoping the upcoming trade season might garner a CB pick but it would have to be in the next couple weeks. I doubt it happens.

  • fb_avatar

    Trea Turner

  • If we go underslot, my obvious first choice is Hoffman, then Beede, then Pentecost. Nola isn't far enough away from 1.4 to consider.

  • My order of preference is as follows...

    1. Aiken
    2. Rodon
    3. Kolek
    4. Gordon
    5. Underslot with Nola, Conforto, or Pentecost

    Not shocking if you've been following along with me, but I am sticking to it. If they don't go Gordon, then I would like to see them going Nola or with one of the college bats in an underslot deal. I am just not a Jackson guy. I wanted to be impressed with him when I saw him, but I just wasn't -- we'll see what the Cubs think.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    I think I'm leaning...

    1. Kolek (maybe just talking myself into this because I feel there's a decent shot, but the lack of breaking stuff just makes him feel safer with the TJS epidemic)
    2. Rodon (workload, inconsistency drop him below Kolek, for me)
    3. Aiken (certainly wouldn't mind, but the late rise leaves me a little wary)
    4. Gordon (premium position, LH bat)
    5. underslot

    Not big on Jackson either. Nobody seems to say his bat is special, just the best in this draft. If he's likely to be a RH corner OF with just a good bat, I don't see that justifying 1.4.

  • In reply to Matt McNear:

    I think 3 of those 4 are possible (not Aiken).

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    I'm used to agreeing with you on most things, but I think you may have just stated word for word what my preferences for the draft are.

    Well, I probably would have left off Conforto. Reports of his defense scare me. Otherwise, you read my mind.

  • In reply to mjvz:

    Haha!

    That defense scares me. I have seen it and wish I could unsee it. It is grotesque (maybe I exaggerate a wee bit) He is about the surest bat, however. But....if I had to go underslot college hitter, I like Pentecost and his ability to stick at catcher best. And he would be cheaper to boot. I don't think Nola will be underslot enough to make it worth their while, so they have to like him emough to pick him at 4.

  • Interesting paragraph by Mark Simon from ESPN about Mike Olt...

    Cubs third baseman Mike Olt has a weird batted ball profile. He’s hitting .176 with nine home runs, one double and eight singles, giving him a .451 slugging percentage.

    Strikeouts are one issue for Olt -- he has 36 in 102 at-bats. But perhaps he’s hitting in a little bit of tough luck.

    Olt is 14-for-17 in at-bats in which he registered a hard-hit ball. But he’s 3-for-14 on medium-hit balls and an amazing 1-for-35 on softly hit ones (his last 25 have been outs).

    Olt’s .029 batting average on soft-hit balls rates tied with Ryan Hanigan for third-worst in the majors. The average major leaguer gets hits on soft-hit balls about 17 percent of the time.

  • In reply to Caps:

    Interesting. The Ks are so glaring with both Olt and Lake that it probably has been masking some underlying silver linings.

  • In reply to mjvz:

    Agreed... I don't think Olt will hit for average, but I think it's not crazy to think that he's not a .176 BA hitter and should improve to at least .230.

  • Edification central is what this place is! :-)

  • In reply to Bilbo161:

    :)

  • John, the CB picks being a relatively new thing, is there any way to see a draft day type trade for one of those? Seems like the timing of the draft is such that it comes quite a bit before the trade season when teams are actually ready to consumate such deals. At this point it is hard to imagine much trading of these picks ever happening. The Cubs need to leverage their IFA $$$s in trades this year. Could you see that being useful as part of a trade for a CB pick? That would definitely be useful if the Cubs want to go the under slot route a #4.

  • In reply to Bilbo161:

    I think a trade for a CB pick would be great but I see it as unlikely -- in part because you do have to do it before the draft starts. Teams normally don't make those kind of moves early.

  • In reply to Bilbo161:

    Not John. But my understanding is that CB picks can not be traded after June 1.

  • In reply to Holy Cattle:

    Yes, I believe that is correct.

  • ahh, thanks. So why do they make it dificult on purpose? Is there some evil lurking in the closet that holds the CB picks? I'm sure there must be some kind of reason that just involves the leagues desire for absolute control. :(

  • A trade of Hammel to Colorado or Oakland makes some sense for a CB pick.

  • In reply to Holy Cattle:

    I said the other day that a trade of Samardzija to Colorado for Butler, the 35th pick, and Herrera would be a good deal for both teams. The Rockies keep Gray, and the Cubs get to jump the trade market again, and with their most important deal in the books, they can focus on Hammell, Villanueva, C.J Edwards, Veras, Wright, Russell, Scheirholtz, etc etc. to find the deals that make sense.

  • My Draft Predictions/Notes:

    Astro's draft either Rodon or Aiken at #1 overall.

    Rodon will not get past #2. The worst kept secret in the draft is that the Marlins Scouting Dept. has Tyler Kolek as their #1 pitcher. The 2nd worst kept secret in the draft is that they have been overruled by the ownership and if Rodon is their at 1.2 they will take him as the Cuban draw is too much too pass up.

    If the draft goes Rodon - Kolek, Sox will take Aiken, but if the draft goes Aiken - Rodon the White Sox might pass on Kolek at #3 - and go with Jackson or possibly a guy like Kyle Freeland who is a lot like Sale in his delivery.

    Will the Cubs take Kolek in that scenario? I go back and forth, on the one hand he would seem to fit the bill of an exceptional talent with his triple digit velocity but I keep hearing how people are worried about his weight of 250 lbs at 6'5" which would be the heaviest ever taken - (Sabathia was 6'6", 240 lbs). Could Kolek fall to #5 if Jackson or Gordon is the Cubs player? What the Astro's do at #1 could really change things for the Cubs.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ghost Dawg:

    On Rodon: is that from the draft gurus or are you hearing that somewhere else?

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Multiple places but Kiley McDaniel from scoutingbaseball (who I consider very knowledgeable, scouts guys multiple times, hits all the circuits, and talks to tons of scouts) said it plainly a couple of days ago...

    "There's two rumors you hear a lot on the Marlins pick: 1) that the Oklahoma-bred scouting staff loves midwestern power arms and think Kolek is the best player in the draft and 2) that ownership won't let the scouting staff pass on Latin pitcher as talented as Rodon that could drive attendance in Miami's market. In this scenario, they don't have to choose between the two, so Kolek is the pick. It sounds like Miami would take Rodon over Kolek in the case that Aiken ends up going to Houston."

  • In reply to Ghost Dawg:

    Sounds like scout speculation. Which is what all of this is anyway.

    I've heard from my own industry sources that they have been scouting Jackson heavily recently, while Keith Law backs that up by saying they've scouted hitters more than pitchers. Both Law and BA have Jackson going #2.

    I'm not saying one person is right or wrong, but there is a ton of info that swirls around this time of year. Lots of chatter, but nobody knows for certain what is going to happen. Only thing I am certain of is they like all 3 pitchers and Jackson

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Do you think the Cub take Kolek if he falls to them? I'm positive they would take Rodon & Aiken, but I'm less sure on Kolek.

  • In reply to Ghost Dawg:

    Less sure than the other two, but I am still pretty certain they would.

  • fb_avatar

    Reading the comments here have given me a lot of optimism. My guess is we'll exit the draft with one of Rodon, Kolek, or Gordon and all 3 of them have the potential to be the best pick in the draft. Also, given, you don't draft for need but if you were to draw up a list of needs for the Cubs all 3 of them would appear near the top of it.

  • Cubs will contend in 2015 optimistic or 2016 realistcally so my pick is Rodon , Nola in that order, need arms that line up with the bats , hell with 2020 where Kolek , Aiken, Gordon or Jackson line up , lets win sooner and those 2 arms can do it , for all the Nola arm slot , size ece=t ect sceptics , He threw 116 pitches his last start and his final FB was 93 . no endurance problems and best command , change up combo in draft . Give up the low ceiling arguments he is a winner and nobobody makes solid contact consistantly on him RH or LH batters. He just has that unwritten it factor .

  • ps results do matter in baseball. kind of more important that ceiling , you people remind me of the folks who would rather buy a $20 lottery ticket with the slim chance to win big or take the sure $10,000 dollar winner . That said given the Cubs organization and farm nobody should have a board that isnt Rodon , Nola , NOBODY .

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    If results matter, boards would look a lot different than they do.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    And that is why the bust rate is so high in the draft John, GMs fall in love with what could be instead of what is . If a team gets a MLB starter quality guy in rd 1 that is a win, an true elite impact guy that is a bonus , picking at 4 take the most sure thing, PS Eckersley and Tekulve sucked and that is Nola except Nola has the stuff to get LH batters out .

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    oh and low arm slot guys for some reason never need TJ or go down with shoulders

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    The bust rate is much lower at the top.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    thats true but pretty sure the 2 guys i think the Cubs need to take at 4 are top 10 picks on any board

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    I have nothing against Nola, just that he's not an upside guy and questions about arm slot are ones I've heard whenever I've asked about him. The Cubs shouldn't (and won't be) drafting on current, short term rotational needs. If they do take Nola, it'll be because they like him as much as you do -- or close. anyway ;) And if they aren't worried about arm slot, size, etc, then I am fine with it.

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    This is not the NFL Draft where your 1st round draft pick is ready to start from day one. All MLB draft picks are based on projection. Nobody is ready for the Major Leagues upon being drafted in baseball. While college pitchers like Rodon or Nola might theoretically be more advanced they are not final products by any stretch of the imagination. Teams draft based upon the best combination of projection and the likelihood of the prospect achieving that projection.

  • In reply to Ghost Dawg:

    just stop unless you have been scouted , are a scout or have connections . jesus . Rodon and Nola are better right now than 40% of the Cubs rotation . I will stop and thank Jesus that Theo , Jed and McCleod are making the pick at 4 looking at the big picture of this franchise. bats are coming 2015.2016 and no cash for a TOR arm in FA , better get an arm that lines up with the bats . wow is that too hard to understand after 3 years of rebuild .

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    You have no idea what you re talking about. NOBODY is suggesting that Rodon or Nola are ready for the Majors. NOBODY. Scouts are projecting Rodon and Nola as well, they are NOT finished products. You need to stop, because you are seriously uninformed.

  • In reply to Ghost Dawg:

    Bryan knows baseball, we just don't happen to agree. No big deal.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    My comment was in response to him saying: "just stop unless you have been scouted , are a scout or have connections . jesus ."

    As if I have to be a scout to know that MLB draft picks are not MLB ready and are ALL based on projection, but regardless it pisses me off when somebody tells me I can't comment.

  • I think the Cubs need to solve two problems. They are devoid of starting pitching depth and need for a successful draft. So if "The Big 3" pitchers are off the board I would love to see Nola. He might not be a true Ace but how many are there really? You need quality starters period.

    I do not fault the FO as much as Ricketts. I don't know if Theo/Jed missed on the number or Ricketts didn't give them the cash but missing out on Tanaka, Darvish, and Ryu because we underbid is the challenge and wreaks of short-sightedness. My assumption is Ricketts is at fault versus the FO. I could be wrong. If we preach talent acquisition by an means necessary then FO and Ricketts have to win these opportunities and get your studs.

  • In reply to Gator:

    You don't draft for need. Anybody you take even in round 1 (besides rare exceptions) is at minimum 2 years away from contributing at the MLB level and most likely 3-4 years away. You have to trust your board and take the player that your Front Office/Scouts/Development Team feels has the best combination of projection and likeliness to achieve that projection.

  • In reply to Ghost Dawg:

    you draft for a MLB starter in rd 1 that can help the team anything else is gravy, Relief pitchers excluded

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    So you would rather the Cubs take a pitcher they think will be a #3 starter in 2-3 years vs a player they believe will be an all-star shortstop or catcher in 3-4 years? Hypothetically of course.

  • In reply to Ghost Dawg:

    Totally agree with you Ghost Dawg. No way the Cubs should take Nola. If you can't get one of the Big 3 arms, you don't then grab a second tier pitcher at #4. Unless they are thinking about signing him underslot.

    Otherwise, the Cubs need to take the Best Player Available. PERIOD.

  • In reply to Ghost Dawg:

    depends on the situation with the team , is my team loaded at SS, Do i have a debt problem from purchase of team that ties my hands in FA, do i have a need for MLB ready SP, Do i have a farm that is full of impact bats , Cubs situation is unique . i would agree with you in most years , most cases but the time to strike for SP is now and since FA most likely isnt an option better get it now in the draft . Rodon and Nola are ready made plug into a rotation as soon as 2015 , they both line up with the bats and both have the ability to be MLB winning SPs , win win ,

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Bryan Craven:

    You're forgetting another important way to get an impact arm: the trade market. And there you can get a guy who has passed the real danger zone for arm injuries. If we go that way, having a farm system stocked with shortstops is only a benefit. (And that's assuming they won't pay up for an ace when the time comes which, based on Tanaka, I think may be inaccurate.)

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    The challenge is we can trade position players but they too have to be major league ready to get major league pitching talent back. So right now we are at the start of the logjam at the middle infield. So we have to free up space (trades or position moves) to keep this process going with the SS's in the system now. All levels but AA have a SS of potential value. The challenge is keeping guys moving up so you can develop a steady stream of valuable players. Once one stagnates then the trade process stalls

  • In reply to Gator:

    i agree Gater and because these misses the Cubs have to get an arm that can makr the show quick, Rodon , Nola any other board is a losers board who doesnt want to win before 2020

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Bryan Craven:

    Man are you going to be pissed on draft day.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    i doubt it , really . i really doubt it .

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    I am also intrigued by Newcomb. I just watched Youtube videos of him. Seems to repeat his delivery well. Seems smooth as he explodes toward the plate. I worry about getting stolen on while in the stretch which seems odd for a lefty but has a delay in his motion. That can be offset with a better move toward first to keep runners honest. I believe his secondaries need more work but I would throw a change in that mix to offset his plus fastball. The challenge of lesser competition proves to be untrue, then I would be more comfortable with him than a HS pitcher.

    Rondon, Nola, Newcomb at 4. (Go for high hit rate for this pick - minimize the floor/risk)

  • Looks like Kyle Freeland had a tough outing today. But he was pitching on a short rest.

    http://goo.gl/bSiL39

  • In reply to Alex:

    I don't believe Freeland is in the discussion.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    I hope you're right, John. I read BA's John Manual's Mock Draft that had Freeland going to the Cubs.

    http://goo.gl/PcNlD1

    I also saw it in a couple of other places.

  • In reply to Alex:

    I saw it too, but have no idea where they got that from. The guy who does amateur scouting at BA loves Freeland, I think they just wanted to put him up high in the draft and they know the Cubs are short on pitchers.

  • Lets be real Ricketts isnt gonna un ass 200M any time soon for a front line arm so The Cubs BETTER leave this draft with either Rodon or Nola at that 4th pick . PERIOD .

  • After hearing...er...reading what John, and others have said about Jackson it's making me shy away from him a little bit. Still, my guess is that if Rodon or Kolek slip to 4 they'll take them. If not, Gordon will probably be their guy. I haven't heard anything in regards to the Cubs putting the full court press on any of the guys, at least not yet.

  • Well i will be happy with whoever the Cubs FO takes at 4 but my personal view wont be changed and since i have insides in LA Nola is my choice at 4 unless Rodon slips. 2 years the best pitcher in college baseball has its merits , Nola just gets people out and wins , something Cubs pitchers have a little problem with

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    Don't pre-order that Nola jersey just yet.

  • In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    well i am comfortable that the Cubs FO has had meaningful time scouting Nola , leave it at that, that said i want Rodon then Nola

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    True but there have been plenty of great college pitchers who got people out and won games, it doesn't make them MLB'ers. There's always guys like Kyle Sleeth and Kennie Steenstra, great college pitchers, winners but not MLB'ers. I'm not saying Nola is on par with those guys, but just making a point that college success doesn't necessarily translate.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    and those guys never had that it factor ,,,,, Nola does .

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    a long time ago when my scout and a dare say my friend Harry Dorish said to me it doesnt matter the flash it matters the meal in the plate . I ssked him what the hell does that mean, He simply said dont over think a pick , granted i went to school and bypassed the draft but now i kind of get it.

  • John, are you as impressed with Castro as much as I am right now. Even his outs are very well hit.

  • In reply to jswick23:

    Absolutely. Looks like he knows what he wants to do up there now.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Hit the ball hard his first 2 times for outs then gets a single on a softly hit blooper...

  • In reply to jswick23:

    Justice!

  • Johnny Cuerto just had a meltdown, guess who leads baseball in ERA? :)

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jimmie Ward:

    Well that doesn't help my fantasy team :-(

  • John, I wish you would've added just one more poll question.

    Q: Didn't understand 3 or more of the questions in this poll.
    1. Yes
    2. No
    3. Best player available. Period.

  • In reply to YouCannotBeSerious:

    Haha!

  • Olt at bat bases loaded. First grand slam?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Oneear:

    He had one a few weeks ago.

  • fb_avatar

    http://www.chicagonow.com/cubs-den/2011/06/cubs-draft-prospects-starling-rising-so-whats-plan-b/#image/1

    "more disheartening for the Cubs is that Bubba Starling's stock continues to rise"

    As long as we don't pick Vitters I am happy! I am so confused that I do not even know what I want. I just hope we get the BPA without trying to save the money for later rounds.

    Only 1 out away from Tanaka's loss and hearing GO CUBS GO!!!!

  • In the 3rd to 5th rounds I would love to see Taylor Gushue. Switch Hitting Offensive catcher prospect from UF. He left high school early to take Vogelbach's spot on Florida's roster. Led SEC in hitting this year. Plays C 3B and 1B. Athletic and young with some projection left.

Leave a comment