Buster Olney ranks Cubs infield as the best in baseball

[Parade_Rain]

I find it extremely surprising that a top draft pick is doing well. That rarely happens in professional sports.

:aj:

 

[Parade_Rain]

It's still quite interesting that Rory and SecondTimer are attached at the hip in threads.

 

[DanTown]

"Normal projections"? I'm not talking about "normal" projections because the Cubs didn't view Schwarber as a "normal" hitter. What were the Cubs and your expectations on his track? What time frame did you expect? 2016? 2017?

Bryant, a similar scored bat, got a full second season in the minors and had 740 PA in the minors.

Schwarber pre 2015 was a wildly different prospect rank (19 at BA, 49 at MLB.com, 77 at BP) but no one said "yeah, he's ready now to hit .246 with 35 HR in a regular season work-load". But again, I don't think anyone thought he'd be a MLB ready hitter in mid 2015.

If you would have asked me when he was drafted, I would have said he'd probably be a bat ready to go in 2016. His advanced hitting in 2014 would have maybe moved him up to a September call-up for 2015 but I didn't think his bat was ready to handle MLB pitching. I mean he had just 310 PA at AA/AAA. Will you concede that almost no hitters spend that little time in advanced ball?

 

[ijustposthere]

Results speak for themselves? Wow, it's really easy to please Cubs fans. All you have to do is tank the seasons for 5 years straight and hoard position prospects.

See, a Sox fan would actually wait for the team to win something before declaring how "strong" some suit's plan is. Tanking is easy. Pocketing revenues and not spending any money on the club for 5 or 6 years is easy. Winning a championship utilizing this method is extremely hard. You need to realize how absurd you sound to the rest of the non-koolaid drinking world. The Cubs still haven't won shit and until they do, you will always be los4ers.

LOL, you're such a tard. We get it, Sox fans are fairweather, thanks for letting us know.

 

[DanTown]

Thought Bryant was kept in the minors for salary reasons, not because of questions about his ability.

Pete Incaviglia didn't spend any time in the minors, had a similar "bat" to Schwarber, and had 0 PA at AA/AAA. He was drafted lower than Schwarber, too.

One, Bryant got an entire full season in the minors that not even Schwarber got.

Two, Bryant had nearly twice as many PA (594 vs 310) at AA/AAA.

Three, some guy drafted in 1985 is not analogous to Kyle Schwarber being drafted in 2015. Is there a ton of recent history that says a guy gets just 600 PA in the minors with only 310 PA in AA/AAA before going to the majors? Correra would be a comparison but Correra was a higher ranked prospect and went higher in his draft than Schwarber did and he had 1200 minor league PA before his call-up.

 

[Parade_Rain]

NVM. Not going there.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Thought Bryant was kept in the minors for salary reasons, not because of questions about his ability.

Pete Incaviglia didn't spend any time in the minors, had a similar "bat" to Schwarber, and had 0 PA at AA/AAA. He was drafted lower than Schwarber, too.

Incaviglia played college ball when they didn't even have to swing -3 bats. The "bats" weren't similar. :tongue:

 

[FirstTimer]

Also, let me get this right. Its coach speak when he says he outperformed expectations but its not coach speak when he said we should have expected this? OKK?

:whoosh:

Way to miss the point. Hint, both could be/are coach speak so it's really makes your Theo point moot. You can't acknowledge one and dismiss the other.

you have yet to show one projection that had him doing what he did last year?

You also have yet to show one projection of him NOT doing what he did last year.

No, you just can't read/just want to cherry pick comments from articles. It's pretty sad when you clearly ignored the Cubs scout directly contradicting your idea.

 

[FirstTimer]

Bryant, a similar scored bat, got a full second season in the minors and had 740 PA in the minors.

Schwarber pre 2015 was a wildly different prospect rank (19 at BA, 49 at MLB.com, 77 at BP) but no one said "yeah, he's ready now to hit .246 with 35 HR in a regular season work-load". But again, I don't think anyone thought he'd be a MLB ready hitter in mid 2015.

If you would have asked me when he was drafted, I would have said he'd probably be a bat ready to go in 2016. His advanced hitting in 2014 would have maybe moved him up to a September call-up for 2015 but I didn't think his bat was ready to handle MLB pitching. I mean he had just 310 PA at AA/AAA. Will you concede that almost no hitters spend that little time in advanced ball?

So he exceeded expectations by a couple of months? Wow. Yeah, he really blew away everything..............

 

[SilenceS]

:whoosh:

Way to miss the point. Hint, both could be/are coach speak so it's really makes your Theo point moot. You can't acknowledge one and dismiss the other.


You also have yet to show one projection of him NOT doing what he did last year.

No, you just can't read/just want to cherry pick comments from articles. It's pretty sad when you clearly ignored the Cubs scout directly contradicting your idea.

:hawked:

 

[Parade_Rain]

SecondTimer is Brett05 on steroids.

 

[brett05]

SecondTimer is Brett05 on steroids.

:smh:
I am nothing like FirstTimer.

 

[FirstTimer]

:smh:
I am nothing like FirstTimer.

True. I'm intelligent.

 

[Parade_Rain]

:smh:
I am nothing like FirstTimer.

You always need to have the last word. On steroids this would be no matter how wrong you are, you keep the conversation going to exhaustion until the opposing party says "mataei".

 

[Diehardfan]

I find it extremely surprising that a top draft pick is doing well. That rarely happens in professional sports.

I'm surprised that's not a quote from a Chicago Bears GM......

 

[SilenceS]

I'm surprised that's not a quote from a Chicago Bears GM......

Funny thing, in baseball, its more likely not to happen then to happen but thats not my business.

 

[brett05]

You always need to have the last word. On steroids this would be no matter how wrong you are, you keep the conversation going to exhaustion until the opposing party says "mataei".

:smh: whatever. the irony.

 

[Parade_Rain]

:smh: whatever. the irony.

 

[brett05]

Please extrapolate on your steroid thoughts...I haven't been here for awhile and would be interested in hearing them.

I'm not sure what PR is speaking about. but I will try and give a quick stand.

1) Steroids do not make you bigger it only helps to recover
2) Until there was punishment for taking such things, no one broke anything (A rule with no consequences is no rule)

There you go.

 

[brett05]

Agree with you on 2). It doesn't look promising for 1), though. It appears to be a slippery slope to retardation on several fronts. For instance, its the 'recovery' from extreme weightlifting that makes you bigger. You are just incorrectly arguing semantics, if I am understanding your point properly.

Stop the inflammatory speech, and let's continue.

If I take steroids and sit in front of my computer how big will my body get? How much stronger will I be? It's a lot more than semantics.