MLB Draft: Cubs select Stanford shortstop Nico Hoerner in the 1st Rd. (24th pick)

Nico Hoerner

Nico Hoerner

First Round (24): SS Nico Hoerner

College: Stanford / B-T: R-R  / HT-WT 6'0"-200 / DOB: 05/13/1997

Baseball America: 42, MLB.com: 52, 2080 Baseball: 43

SLOT VALUE: $2,724,000

Scouting grades according to MLB.com: Hit: 55 | Power: 40 | Run: 55 | Arm: 50 | Field: 50 | Overall: 50

It should be no surprise the Cubs went with a proven college bat, but it may be a surprise which one they actually chose. Nico Hoerner is a versatile infielder who has played shortstop for Stanford the past two years after playing second base as a freshman. His arm is considered strong enough for third base if needed and Hoerner has plenty of athleticism to play the outfield if necessary. The Cubs place an enormous amount of emphasis on a prospect being able to play a premium defensive position so they must feel comfortable with Hoerner's chances of sticking at SS.

At the plate, Hoerner meets the criteria the Cubs target. His hit tool is his best attribute. Capable of driving the ball to all fields, Hoerner boasts an impressive K:BB ratio in his career. He has shown an increasing ability to barrel up the ball and some power is beginning to emerge as well. He didn't hit many home runs with Stanford this season, but did hit 6 last summer in the Cape Cod League in just 40 games. There are those that believe Hoerner can still fill out a bit more and there may be even more power to come. He has hit over .300 in each of the last two years on the Cape, which is a proving ground the Cubs put a ton of stock in.

According to Jason McLeod: "Nico is a talented middle infielder who handles the bat extremely well, hits to all fields and has a high contact rate. He hits the ball hard, and we think there is more power to come He has multiple tools on the field, and all the background work we did shows he has incredible make-up. He fits exactly what we’re looking for in the organization."

 

Second Round (62): OF Brennen Davis

School: Basha HS, Chandler, AZ / B-T: R-R  / HT-WT 6'4"-175 / DOB: 11/2/1999

Baseball America: 136, MLB.com: 145, 2080 Baseball: NR

Scouting grades according to MLB.com:  Hit: 45 | Power: 45 | Run: 70 | Arm: 55 | Field: 50 | Overall: 45

A former two-sport star on the basketball court and the baseball diamond, Brennen Davis gave up the hardwood to focus exclusively on baseball and the decision appears to have paid off. He was committed to play ball at Miami but it appears the Cubs have offered him enough money to get him to give up school. He is built like a basketball player, tall and lean, and covers a lot of ground with his long legs. He is definitely one of those toolsy boom-or-bust OF prospects. There is a lot of work to do on his swing, so don't be shocked if you don't see him outside rookie ball for a couple of years.

SLOT VALUE:  $1,060,900

 

Second Round Compensation (77): OF Cole Roederer

School: Hart HS, Santa Clarita, CA / B-T: L-L  / HT-WT 6'0"-175 / DOB: 09/24/99

Baseball America: 161, MLB.com: NR, 2080 Baseball: NR

Another pick, another raw but toolsy prep outfielder. An injury to his non-throwing shoulder halted the ascent of Cole Roederer up draft boards this season but the Cubs saw enough. He isn't very big but there are good reports on his bat speed as Roederer began hitting for in-game power this year. Reminds some scouts of Andrew Benintendi coming out of high school.

SLOT VALUE: $775,100

NOTE: Pick awarded to Cubs as compensation for losing Wade Davis 

 

Second Round Compensation (78): RHP Paul Richan

School: University of San Diego / B-T: R-R  / HT-WT 6'2"-200 / DOB: 03/26/97

Baseball America: 164, MLB.com: 175, 2080 Baseball: NR

Scouting grades according to MLB.com: Fastball: 60 | Slider: 50 | Curveball: 45 | Changeup: 45 | Control: 55 | Overall: 45

A polished college arm with a four-pitch mix highlighted by a 91-94 mph fastball and good slider, Paul Richan did not finish the collegiate season as well as he began it but obviously garnered enough interest from the Cubs for his work earlier in the year and in his career. Richan walks very few hitters. He attended the same high school as the Cubs previous pick Cole Roederer, which also happens to be the same school which Mike Montgomery attended.

BONUS SLOT VALUE: $762,900

NOTE: Pick awarded to Cubs as compensation for losing Jake Arrieta 

 

Filed under: Draft, MLB Draft

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Theo epstein just drafted tommy lastella 2.0 in the 1st round.Wow,I've lost all confidence in this guy.The eloy trade for that bum was the tipping point but this just sealed the deal.

  • In reply to bolla:

    I would absolutely take a Tommy La Stella type player with the 24th pick. Especially if he can also play SS.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    A Tommy La Stella type player - as you mentioned Michael, especially if he can play a decent defensive SS - is a very useful guy to have around.

    Sounds like he's also improved consistently over the last couple of years in college, could be a solid OBP guy and even if he never develops tons of power, could be a good option for leading off.

    If he's a fairly advanced hitter already - where to you figure that the Cubs start him in the system this Summer?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Ernst:

    Players like Trout being available in the mid-20's is rare. An MLB starter in the 1st round is satisfactory to me.

  • In reply to bolla:

    Hot take, bolla? I think their record of first-round picks while here speaks for itself, though most were much higher. They may see something no one else does, like the Schwarber pick, or this could be an under-slot pick as part of a larger strategy. There is a massive amount of communication and signability issues we're not aware of. I have no reason not to trust their high picks.

  • In reply to BarleyPop:

    With the Cubs, they haven't developed anyone other than picks in top 10. They don't have a history of grabbing unknowns. Even Schwarber was a top 20 rated player.

  • In reply to springs:

    That's very true, and I mentioned our recent successful picks were much higher than #24. Just from memory, Baez (from Hendry) was 9, Almora 6, Bryant 2, Schwarber 4, and Happ I think another 9. Those are high picks, but that's also an amazing run of success in identifying and developing those players. A top-10 pick becoming a ML regular, let alone a star, is far from given. And I certainly don't know of any team with a proven history of successfully grabbing and developing unknowns.

  • In reply to BarleyPop:

    There are successful picks everywhere, but as you said, likelihood of stars is higher earlier.

    My concern with the picks was overstated last night (long night at work....scouting beyond top stars is imperfect, maybe we saw something others didn't) but mainly consists of three points:

    1) We don't have dominant superstar talent in minors right now. In the first round, there were some potential stars, albeit with risks. A lefty who throws 100 mph and had 15+k/9 in college this year. A HS pitcher who was expected, before getting hurt, to go #1. These aren't the only two. Hoerner is neither a guaranteed floor and especially not a high ceiling. Unlike the first two I referenced above (or multiple others), Hoerner doesn't go into our top 5 prospects IMO, much less become #1. Pick really made little sense to me unless it was to save for later high-end picks.

    2) We appeared to save for other picks, but then appear to spend on players beyond their value. Yes Davis wants over $1mm to sign, but that doesn't mean he is worth it. He has shown little so far since moving from basketball. Similarly, Roederer has upside but not worth his asking price. I am reminded of us paying $1 million plus for DJ Wilson or overpaying for Jacob Hanneman...even if both worked out to likely success, it still was overpaying for their market value.

    3) Richan makes no sense. I saw him early in season (against Michigan) and he looked good (though far from great....more4th to 5th round) but he looked nowhere near that good as season went on.

    4) Finally, any analysis by non-experts must include thoughts by other experts. Look where people who spend their lives ranking players ranked them:

    Pick 62: Baseball America: 136, MLB.com: 145, 2080 Baseball: NR

    Pick 77: Baseball America: 161, MLB.com: NR, 2080 Baseball: NR

    Pick 78: Baseball America: 164, MLB.com: 175, 2080 Baseball: NR

    Even if we wanted these three players, we could have taken someone else at 62 (and possibly 77) and gotten them all later.

  • In reply to springs:

    Amen Springs. Though I will try to give the people who do this for a living the benefit of a doubt, i still find it very difficult to pass up some of the players you mentioned when we also look at the players taken after Hoerner. Maybe not all of them would have been available later, but their rankings weren't exactly impressive. McCleod and co hold their hands pretty tight to their bodies, so maybe they saw something that the industry missed. But how do you pass on McClanahan? I know other teams did as well, but a lefty who hits triple digits with an already advanced change, as well as a slider that flashes plus. I get the whole TJ scare, but 3 plus pitches from a southpaw is tough to pass up where were drafting.

  • In reply to springs:

    Respectively springs but most of your criticism of picks that this organization made were from rounds 2 or later in previous drafts where of course the probability of success is going to be a lot lower and they haven't drafted as high as 24 in a long time so I don't think it's fair to say that we shouldn't trust Theo because most of his draft successes were top 10 picks. He showed with Boston that he's perfectly capable of drafting good players at the end of the 1st round he just hasn't had many picks like that in his cubs tenure.

  • In reply to springs:

    Thank you.These guys are brainwashed into drinking the epstein kool aid no matter what. Logic seems to go over their heads.

  • In reply to bolla:

    Are you and Greg Simmons related, by chance?

  • In reply to bolla:

    some would call a broad generalization such as yours illogical. if you've bothered to read any of the posts, not everyone is overly pleased with the selection. though for you to blatantly ignore the fact the cubs have had a lot of success under Epstein drafting infielders seems like a pretty blatant omission of facts. would you prefer the Hendry regime? are you not pleased with the results of the last 3 seasons? i'm upset about gifting Gleyber Torres to the Yankees for a rental. terrible value deal, not to mention he has more homers than KB in 80 less ABs. but could we have won in 2016 without Chapman? i also didn't like the inclusion of Jimenez in the Q deal, since it appeared no one was offering close to a prospect of his caliber. but since starting full time im 2012, he's been one of the most consistent starters in baseball, and is top 10 in WAR at his position, even including his subpar start. plus he came with 3 more years of cost control. i can at least see the logic behind it, even if i disagree

  • In reply to CubbieInfantry2327:

    I was honestly joking around.I wasn't serious, I don't know anything about these prospects I just read hoerners profile and thought la stella. But i agree with what you said about torres and jimenez 2 big time overpays.Even though the cubs needed chapman specifically in game 5. I feel like theo could of got a good closer for less,especially in july 2016 the farm was MUCH stronger. It's really hard to watch torres tear it up like he has and not think what if and I will never like the quintana trade unless quintana pitches a complete game shutout gem in the world series.There was a reason hahn seeked out theo and not the other way around.It's whatever but I'm sick of white sox fans at my job throwing it my face daily what jimenez(and cease) are doing

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to springs:

    So, the Cubs don't have a good history of developing players not drafted in the Top-10?

    First of all, most "stars" are drafted in the Top-10 compared to any other 10 pick stretch for hopefully obvious reasons.

    Similarly a higher percentage of 1st round picks make the major leagues than other rounds taken as a single round (more 1st rounders make the majors than 2nd rounders, for instance).

    The Cubs also don't have a sequence of "clunkers" either. No "Hayden Simpson"s that I remember during the Theo/Jed era. Myabe Jake Stinnett? They have guys that have not yet developed into MLB talent, it is true, but that doesn't mean that they were bad picks. Nor have I given up hope that some will still pan out A lot of things can de-rail a career. And some of these guys were traded as well.

    As for first round picks out of the Top-10 they have had 1 (2017).

    Honestly I find the rankings by other experts to be interesting. Obviously it is possible that the Cubs use other criteria or weight them differently. I also wonder if they picked a couple guys that they might be able to "under-slot" and then have money available to make a splash later. Maybe a smaller version of what they did in 2014.

  • In reply to bolla:

    I do enjoy your posts and comments

  • In reply to bolla:

    I'm confused. What "deal" did Theo "seal?" I wonder if Theo is pacing in his office, grinding his fist into his palm and muttering, "@%#&^#! I've just sealed the deal!"

  • In reply to bolla:

    Are you gonna stop being a Cubs fan or something?

  • In reply to bolla:

    Cmon Bolla Theo Epstein doesn't deserve our confidence??? You've had some hot takes some of which were somewhat justified but that's ridiculous buddy Theo is arguably the best drafter of position players of all time you're the 1st person I know of that doesn't have confidence in him the guys a hall of fame GM/executive.

    As for the pick I get that he's not the most exciting pick especially on mock drafts but remember that this organization has been outstanding not just good at identifying position players throughout the draft. In addition, Tommy La Stella is a darn good contact/on base hitter his weaknesses are that 1. he has little to no power 2. He's not a particularly strong defender being easily below average at 3B because of his weak arm/limited athleticism and average/below average at 2B. And 3. He has below average speed especially for a smaller framed player.

    Hoerner on the other hand like La Stella brings outstanding contact and on base ability but think of him as a La stella on steroids. Even though he only had a few home runs a lot of evaluators said that he has better raw power than those numbers indicate. MLB.com said that "While the numbers don't necessarily reflect it, there is some power for him to tap into." Tommy La stella doesn't have raw power to tap into so there's one difference between them. In addition he's a SS so he automatically has a lot more defensive value than La Stella given his stronger athleticism and stronger arm. Finally, he's a 60 grade runner which projects him to be the fastest player on our team and a potential leadoff hitter he's even faster than Bryant and Javier Baez just to put more context into his speed grade. Now let me ask you Bolla respectively, if you have a Tommy La Stella but with more power and way way better speed and defense then isn't that a pretty darn good player when you think of it from that vantage point. Don't just go by a players number grades too you'd be surprised what those number grades were on certain members of our team like Ian Happ and Almora. Ian Happ for example was only graded to have 50 power on some sites which obviously seems ridiculous now. And I understand that you'd like to see guys that are projected to go higher on mock drafts that you read but understand that the MLB mock drafts aren't nearly as advanced and accurate at predicting the draft order as opposed to NFL or NBA mock drafts you've gotta wait and see how these kids develop because MLB draft boards are extremely subjective to the team that's drafting. All I know is regardless of what you say about the Q trade that's a separate subject and I think Theo has most definitely earned our confidence when it comes to his ability to draft positional players I'm still confused as to why you're not happy with Theo of all people in the organization he's not going to be perfect but that doesn't diminish what he's accomplished in his career.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    You're only saying all of this because you're brainwashed and have been drinking the Epstein kool-aid.

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    Maybe we should let the Baseball America guys run the cubs instead. Who cares if they would've taken a bust over baez, conforto over schwarber and Jon Gray over Kris Bryant they're still experts unlike the rest of us and Theo has clearly lost his touch ;)

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    ummmm...kool-aid.

  • In reply to Oneear:

    I think that was a bit of sarcasm by cliff oneear based on some previous comments

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    Roger that. I was just doing my best Homer Simpson. I'll keep working on it.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Oneear:

    The tone of voice doesn't really come through in this written text.

  • In reply to bolla:

    I'm kidding about the pick guys relax.I still think quintana sucks and it makes me sad everytime I see eloy destroying double a. Sorry

    as far as losing confidence in theo ummm..... no comment

  • I like the pick. After going with a bunch of arms last year, I’m glad we can restock the position player part of the farm with this type of talent. I might have preferred Steele Walker or Shane McLanahan, but after the position players the FO has taken in round 1 since 2012 I am 100% stress free. I mean Hoerner is a Stanford guy so that should say something.

  • In reply to GSmit:

    And we don't have many SS in our farm other than Ademan.

  • HERE ARE THE TOP 10 MINOR LEAGUE PROSPECTS IN ALL OF BASEBALL AS OF JUNE 4TH, 2018.
    https://sports.yahoo.com/top-10-prospects-june-4-141100731--spt.html

  • OVER THE YEARS, THERE HAVE BEEN SOME GREAT COMMENTS AND EVALUATIONS BY MIKE MOODY.............KEVIN GALLO WAS ANOTHER WITH THE ABILITY TO PICK TALENT AS HE LIKED KRIS BRYANT FROM THE BEGINNING..... INDIANA HOOSIER WAS THE FIRST TO TOUT JAVIER BAEZ AND HAD SEEN HIM PLAY. UNFORTUNATELY, WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THEM LATELY. RECENTLY, INSaluki HAS DONE A GOOD JOB.

  • It does seem a stretch from a pure 'pick value' stanpoint. But with the number of 2nd round picks, if they're stockpiling a little money for an overslot -- i like that.

  • fb_avatar

    I think underslot also. He seems to be a very capable SS but I expected a more elite talent from this pick.

  • fb_avatar

    Cubs draft results the past years 1st round fantastic. The other rounds c-or D+.

  • fb_avatar

    I disagree I love their late round selections that they have taken in the last few years. Have faith. The has drafted more than enough good players that we should trust the process. Only picks from Theos recent drafts that have let me down was Carson Sands and Dave Berg

  • A right-handed hitting MI who could be MLB-ready on short notice? Yep, that tells me Javy's on the block. Maybe for Machado?

  • In reply to BarleyPop:

    Only if they throw in Almora and Bryant!

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    Surely y'all are joking. Bryant and Almost are staying as Cubs for a long time. Save the money for Harper. Why get Machado as a rental? Then have his agent screw the Cubs in the offseaon.

  • In reply to LRCCubsFan:

    To eliminate any possibility of misunderstanding, YES, I was joking. I meant that they should throw in Schwarber and Contreras...

  • In reply to BarleyPop:

    Ha! But, seriously, this send a message to Rusell, doesn't it?

  • In reply to BarleyPop:

    This draft is about Russell he is gone after this yr watch and see.

  • In reply to cubbie forever:

    Who they drafted has absolutely nothing to do with Russelll.

  • In reply to Eric:

    Then why would they take a SS with the first pick when we need pitching. Watch and see!!!!!!!

  • In reply to cubbie forever:

    They have always stockpiled ss. This one is a very low strikeout and potential power guy. An obp guy is always good.

    In 3-4 years we are going to have to replace zobrist and pay Bryant Rizzo Russell Baez Schwarber and Contreras. So i absolutely love this pick.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to cubbie forever:

    Because he was the guy they wanted? They plan to move him to 2B? They plan on using him as a utility infielder? They like his make-up? They think he might make an appealing trade option for another team in a year or two to get someone without having to trade Javy/Russell/Bryant/Contreras or Vogelbach (can we still include him in every trade offer even though he is no longer part of the organization)?

    As for "We need pitching" they drafted 2 pitchers last year and they haven't helped so, obviously, drafting pitchers doesn't work. Since a draft pick is all about affecting players on this year's team.

  • In reply to cubbie forever:

    I don’t think any draft is about any player on the MLB roster. These picks are always a minimum 2 yrs off, most are more. It’s about making the organization better & stronger.

    It does address a weakness in their minors w/respect to the SS position, especially good hitting ones. After Ademan, who is just now in A+ ball & hitting .220, you can’t name the next guy in line, let alone 1 who comes close to be being what the Cubs look for in their big league SS. Now you can.

    Whether he remains at SS or not remains to be seen. Jason said he’ll start out there in the org going forward. But he probably lines up to be ready in case they can’t sign Russell when his contract is up. Allows them to trade from the middle IF spot as well. Depth has to be everywhere up & down an organization.

  • For any fan to act like they know more about a draft class than a major league scouting staff is laughable!

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to JohnCC:

    Only way to evaluate a draft class is on field results for next 3-5 yrs or more

  • In reply to JohnCC:

    For many years, a LOT of Cubs fans knew more about a draft class than a major league scouting staff. Just sayin'.

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    There is no doubt that this front office under Epstein has upgraded the scouting staff substantially. However, we really don't know WHAT the scouting staff recommended over the years. We only know what the Tribune budget allowed the Hendry front office to draft.

  • In reply to JohnCC:

    For any fan to say they know more than the experts who work at places like MLB, fangraphs and Baseball America, many with background and connections in scouting, is also laughable.

    To pretend that your GM knows more than everyone else is rather foolish, especially when they don't have a history of production. They did exceptionally well drafting in the top 10 picks of the first round. With the Cubs, they haven't done anything else in the draft.

  • In reply to springs:

    You say that like its no big deal how they did wth their top 10 picks. The bottom line is that the vast majority of superstars come in the top 10 picks and most of the better players are 1st rounders. Yet plenty of teams have gotten them wrong. Theo and his team haven't screwed it up. Not at all. I trust them for sure.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to springs:

    I agree that we shouldn't assume that Theo/Jed know more than everyone else. Every team now has good analytics departments and good scouting groups. But that doesn't mean that Theo and Jed don't know what they are doing either. I would also argue that they are not the dumbest guys in baseball. I think they are comfortably Top-5, probably Top-3.

    Don't forget, the MLB draft has gotten much better but players picked often take years to develop. The Cubs run from 2013-2015 picks of guys making their MLB debuts a couple seasons later is rare in baseball history. Much more common was Almora's 4-5 years. And for non-1st round picks 4-6 years is not uncommon. And that assumes nothing like a major injury de-rails things. This isn't like the NFL or NBA draft where they take guys and expect them to make significant contributions in the upcoming year.

  • In reply to springs:

    You really need to look back at the 1st rounds of some of those classes just to see how many teams have been missing on their picks while Theo hasn't missed on a single 1st round pick yet in his cubs tenure. Let's just say if BA were drafting for us we wouldn't have baez, bryant, or schwarber.

  • In reply to JohnCC:

    I agree with you but only to a point. Here's what I know. Every pick was rated about half of what the actual pick was. Pick was rated #52 and taken at #24. Same with the rest. As for the pitcher as a return for Arrietta, he's like the rest. Not a single outstanding trait. The high school kid is fast but can't hit and has a poor arm. Think we could do better drawing out of a hat. It's like they're afraid to take a shot at talent and development. All they drafted with the 4 picks is more mediocrity. Seems to be their new motto.

  • In reply to veteran:

    The easiest way to draft would be to simply take the highest-rated prospect available at selection time. That's what a lot of teams do. I like that the Cubs rely on in-depth analysis of traits both on and off the field to identify candidates and trust their developmental staff to bring them along. Judging by the amount of complaining at Cubs Den about all the horrible trades involving can't miss prospects plus the talent level of the MLB team, I'd say the record looks pretty good.

  • In reply to veteran:

    Depends on the ranking you are looking at. Keith Law had Hoerner as his #39 ranked player and Brennan Davis as his #93 ranked player so if you buy his rankings, the Cubs only slightly reached on both of those picks and clearly liked them.

    Rankings are just educated guesses anyway so I'm not sure why people get too worked up about "value". You like a guy, take him.

  • In reply to Pura Vida:

    Thanks for the information Pura Vida and that's good to know. From what I'm hearing those high school kids like Davis that we got are considered tough signs but they have a lot of tools and long term upside.

  • In reply to veteran:

    This draft is as much about talent and development as any those 2 high school kids we got are raw high upside players that need development and are going to require overslot bonuses to sign.

  • fb_avatar

    Hankins picked by Cleveland #35, Xavier Edwards picked #38 by the Padres. There go my picks.

  • If he provides solid defense at multiple positions with an above-average hit tool, that certainly has some value. And it would be nice to have another player in the lineup who doesn’t strike out.

  • fb_avatar

    Why did we get a second round comp pick for Jake instead of a first round?

  • The compensation picks for signing FA's who declined a qualifying offer were relaxed during the last Collective Bargaining Agreement. Teams were beginning to balk at giving up a 1st-round pick, and many FA's (Fowler is a great example) were receiving greatly reduced offers, if any at all, because of it. A compromise was reached to lessen the draft blow and help those mid-level FA's. We acquired the #77 and #78 picks this year from Philly signing Arrieta and Davis going to the Rockies.

  • fb_avatar

    #62 pick is Brennen Davis, HS outfielder premium athlete according to BA. They had him rated as #135.

  • This draft will take at least 2-3 years to really judge with the 2 HS Ohs both are loaded with potential but patience will be needed in their development. As John used to say progress is not always linear.

  • In reply to CubFanStuckInStl:

    I always miss John, but I especially miss John on draft day. I wonder what he thinks of these picks so far?

  • In reply to BarleyPop:

    Yeah John loved the draft. I remind his pieces each week around top prospects. John and Kevin would have their prospect debates too. It was fun to read

  • In reply to BarleyPop:

    He was awesome at explaining his selections!

  • Outfielders sorry typing too fast.

  • Interesting draft so far. The royals were able to nab Brady Singer at 18 overall, then his rotation mate Jackson Kowar at 33. Good for them! TB is looking pretty strong so far as well. Nabbed who many consider a top 5 talent due to 4 potential plus pitches at maturity in Matthew Liberatore at 16 overall, then grabbed Shane McClanahan who boasts enormous upside bc of triple digit heat, and 2 secondaries that flash plus. Both are lefties. Their next pick was a highschool outfielder named Nick Schnell who I haven't read a lot about, but he's apparently risen up draft boards late. The cards took a guy who has the look of a reliever in Griffin Roberts with his mid 90s heat and possibly the best slider in the draft. His changeup is kinda meh though. Still, with the card's voodoo magic he will probably be the next Thor

  • fb_avatar

    Most of our picks were a lot lower than BA had them--take that with a grain of salt. It's easy to make quick judgements (I know, I've done it tonight) but we do need patience, and remember, if our system might not have elite players now, think of how many are playing for other teams right now--Soler, Candelario, etc. Check back in a few years.

  • How can I not like a kid from the Bay Area? If he goes to Stanford he’s got to be smart. And he’s definitely going to appreciate the cheaper rents/mortgages in Chicago vs. Palo Alto. Weather: not so much. Cubs fans: oh yeah, he’ll love that!

  • But isn't it great that unlike the 2013, 2014, 2015 drafts we already have one the best teams in baseball and we don't to wish and dream of these picks getting here ASAP. Instead I'm thinking of winning at least 4 (and maybe 5) of 6 on this home stand.

  • In reply to TTP:

    Yeah, the great product on the field certainly takes away some of the urgency and immediacy of these picks.

  • fb_avatar

    I said in 2015 that I thought in the next 5 years we’d win at least 1 and maybe 2 or 3 in the next 5 years. We could still do that.
    Also, if you didn’t like the draft (so fa) we have the IFA signings in a month so let’s see what we do then.

  • In reply to Jonathan Friedman:

    Wow what a great crystal ball you have. Do you have another one?? Really your clueless at best.

  • In reply to cubbie forever:

    Insults are easier to take when delivered with poor grammar. How about mastering "your" and "you're" before questioning someone's intelligence?

  • In reply to cubbie forever:

    speaking of clueless....you're :)

  • fb_avatar

    Probably the worst draft class for the cubs in decades!!! Yep i agree with Bolla that Epstein has definitely lost his magic touch. Not one of these top 4 picks will ever see daylight in the bigs and i expect the high school picks to never get past high A ball. Sad....they had 4 of the top 100 picks and they blew it.

  • In reply to Greg Simmons:

    spoken like a true Cardinal fan

  • In reply to Greg Simmons:

    It’s alright Greg.....Cardinals can still re-sign Milton Bradley.....

  • In reply to Greg Simmons:

    Sorry Jonathan that was meant for Greg Simmons!!!!!!

  • In reply to cubbie forever:

    Insults are still unattractive, but they are easier to take when directed at the most annoying person here rather than the nicest.

  • In reply to cubbie forever:

    Well in that case...

  • In reply to Greg Simmons:

    Bound to be at least one HOFer in the bunch, then.

  • In reply to Greg Simmons:

    O'DOYLE RULES!!!

  • In reply to Greg Simmons:

    Take it easy on Greg guys his psyche's fragile right now. It must be hard to stomach the brewers are our real rivals now.

  • Ok, who is left now?

  • I get that we’re knowledgeable fans around here and I get that the Cubs picks didn’t exactly match what we’ve all read about but to think, for even one minute, that you can critique this FO on the DAY OF THE DRAFT on players who won’t hit MLB for 3-5 years is absurd. This isn’t the NFL or NBA draft, this is far less of an exact science. To get angry about any of these picks is silly.

  • In reply to TC154:

    Great comparison on the inaccuracies of MLB mock draft boards versus NFL or NBA. Teams draft boards are way more subjective and varying in MLB just ask those guys where they ranked Schwarber or Baez.

  • Bottom line for our top draft pick. Jason, Jed and Theo know the value of Zo and know he isn't getting any younger. To get a hitter who can play multiple positions that is college proven who isn't too far away from being major league ready is exactly what they were looking for.

  • In reply to KJRyno:

    Exactly. They have clearly outlined their strategy of overstocking athletic players who can strengthen the defense "up the middle." Looks like they are continuing that strategy.

  • In reply to KJRyno:

    Exactly we can use a young player with zobrist's versatility this trade doesn't necessarily mean this guys the SS of the future to me

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    This pick sorry

  • Everyone,
    Please keep the comments clean and about baseball. Do not direct your comments at or about another commenter. Please and thank you.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    I would add that while critical discussion is what we are here for, keep it clean and, if possible, data-driven. Using derogatory playground terms to describe players, managers/coaches and FO personnel, based primarily on short-term, eyeball-driven information, is not likely to convince anybody except trolls. These players, etc., have reached heights in their profession that we mere mortals can only dream about. Criticize their shortcomings, but show some respect.

    I'd also like to encourage the powers-that-be on the site to be a bit more proactive in explaining to the trolls the standards of Cubs Den before more of the valued commentators head for the exits.

  • In reply to wthomson:

    I could not agree with this post more.

  • I might be in the minority but I like Brennen Davis' swing given his long arms. He looks like he keeps his arms in and work in to out with his swing. He also looks like he repeats his swing well. He has a nice throwing motion from the OF. He has long strides (especially compared to Hoerner's choppy steps) so I imagine he glides to the ball. He has the frame to add 30 lbs without getting bulky. I imagine he could drive the ball.

    I imagine Tim Wilken would have approved of this pick if he was still in the FO.

  • In reply to Gator:

    It does seem like a Wilken pick doesn't it? But this FO has not shied away from toolsy OFs and two-sport athletes (Hannemann, Wilson, Mitchell)

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    I do like some of the swings I see in the video, my concern is how consistent is that. Guys with long arms tend to have more trouble keeping consistent mechanics. We've seen it with Heyward and others. Just like a tall, lanky pitcher it usually takes more time to get that locked in.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    Roederer is the one with a bit of a hitch I would like to see worked out.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    That high step timing mechanism looks like it gets his balance off

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    He's got a long ways to go by all accounts but I still like the idea of getting a raw but toolsy kid I feel like Theo hasn't typically taken guys like this so early in previous years. I'm hearing this kids going to be an overslot signing too so that means someone must be signing at a bit of a discount.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    I'm guessing Hoerner is a bit underslot, From what I heard on twitter last night both Davis and Roederer are a bit overslot while Richan is going to be right at slot.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    So another reason that Hoerner has appeal to us then. For me I feel like every year people are clamoring why we didn't take the guys that the mock drafts and websites like but all I have to say is that Theo evaluates positional players especially college positional players as well as any GM in the game so it's hard for me to 2nd guess him when they like someone especially when it's a positional player rather than a pitcher.

  • Thanks for the article and the good information on the newest picks! Even though they are a few years away, its still nice to have some background info. Any idea what time the draft resumes today?
    Keep up the good work!!

  • Nico Hoerner also feels he has projection left. He has the gym rat mentality as he describes himself in the video. He looks like he could add 10 -15 lbs or so of muscle. It looks like all of the Cubs picks have a grindy quality. I see a guy who could be groomed to have leadoff-like capabilities.

  • I often thought I knew something about draft picks, and I did, but it was mostly because I read Cus Den. I remember John liked short stops because they were the best baseball talents. Theo and Jed traded all of Jason's so the front office restocking.

  • Kumar Rocker, Cole Wilcox, and Mike Siani are still available. Rocker and Wilcox are both prep righties who have some pretty firm first round grades. I'd be ecstatic if we can grab one of them at 98. Siani is a prep CF who has had a lot of comp A to second round grades. i certaintly wouldn't be upset if he fell to us at 98 either

  • In reply to CubbieInfantry2327:

    Cubs have already gone with two overslot selections. I'm not sure they'll have enough pool money to entice any of those guys away from school at this point unless they go super underslot with the rest of their picks.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    you're probably right, but i reserve the right to dream big lol

  • I actually like the 1st pick. Overall, though, I’m not as excited now as I was before the 2nd round... I’m not feeling it with the 3 later picks yet... These seem like guys we could’ve picked up later. I understand the signability factors, slots, etc., but it just feels “meh...” so far.

    That said, I do know the FO knows what they’re doing & drafts can’t be finally judged for another 3-4 years.

  • .....Where have you gone Earl Cunnigham a nation turns its lonely eyes to you.......

  • In reply to Wickdipper:

    He is at the salad bar

Leave a comment