Cubs Farm System And Prospects Discussion Thread

[TC in Mississippi]

Who said there weren't red flags? I said its revisionist history because he fit the Cubs needs and the majority of Cubs fans were thrilled with the signing. They were the ones screaming for a left handed bat. I said its a bad signing. I just find it comical people point to that as the worst thing in the world. Edwin Jackson was still a worse signing but the Cubs are winning so no one will speak about it. Hendry best attribute was trades. He made mistakes and he also hit grand slams.

You know I'll disagree with you on Jackson even while admitting it was a bad signing. Despite his struggles his teammates, to a man, liked him and he was a guy who busted his tail to get better every day. The money was bad. I understand what they were trying to do, get a reliable innings eater who could sit in the middle of a questionable rotation on a bad team with the possibility that he'd be a 5th starter on a good one. It made sense but it didn't work. Back to the intangibles he was the kind of guy that Theo and company like and that alone makes it not as bad a signing as Bradley. Also Bradley was added for the Cubs to compete for a Division title and Jackson was added to get through a rebuilding. Sorry, the Bradley signing was worse. If you want to talk about a terrible Theo move we can talk Ian Stewart.

Also not everyone was thrilled with the signing. Nobody I knew was happy with it but because of his 2008 season some of us were cautiously hoping something had turned around with the guy. Here was a critical piece form the time http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2009/1/5/709855/gameboard-set-match-milton .

 

[SilenceS]

LOL. You found it funny that people ragged on Hendry. I gave you two of the reasons why. You claimed it was revisionist history. I clearly provided evidence as to why quite a few people were against the signing well before Bradley played one game in a Cubs uniform. You ignored it anyway. I don't recall Edwin Jackson berating Cubs fans and the Cubs organization and having personal issues with every previous club he played for.

Was he a worst signing?

 

[SilenceS]

You know I'll disagree with you on Jackson even while admitting it was a bad signing. Despite his struggles his teammates, to a man, liked him and he was a guy who busted his tail to get better every day. The money was bad. I understand what they were trying to do, get a reliable innings eater who could sit in the middle of a questionable rotation on a bad team with the possibility that he'd be a 5th starter on a good one. It made sense but it didn't work. Back to the intangibles he was the kind of guy that Theo and company like and that alone makes it not as bad a signing as Bradley. Also Bradley was added for the Cubs to compete for a Division title and Jackson was added to get through a rebuilding. Sorry, the Bradley signing was worse. If you want to talk about a terrible Theo move we can talk Ian Stewart.

Also not everyone was thrilled with the signing. Nobody I knew was happy with it but because of his 2008 season some of us were cautiously hoping something had turned around with the guy. Here was a critical piece form the time http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2009/1/5/709855/gameboard-set-match-milton .

Edwin Jackson was directly signed as a panic move because Anibal Sanchez played Theo like a fiddle to get more money out of Detroit.

 

[Diehardfan]

The Cubs had Carlos Zambrano who fought moire teammates than probably anyone in history. Billy Martin fought fan players and umpires. I'm fine with saying the signing was bad because it was. My problem is people acting like it was the death sentence of the Cubs and the worst contract ever. Theo already signed a worst contract for the Cubs

If you're referring to the Jackson signing, it just depends on how you look at it. If anyone actually thought Jackson could help the Cubs contend...well, then it was an awful signing. But if you look at it in the context that they paid him so much money that they were forced to keep shuttling him out there no matter how horrible he was and that in turn helped lead them to draft spots where guys like Bryant and Schwarber were waiting. Probably not done by design...but that's how it played out.

 

[chibears55]

I was happy they signed Bradley...

I was hoping he could just not be a total ass and just be productive..
He was the bat they needed in the lineup, almost like their Jason Heyward type

Sent from my LG-V495 using Tapatalk

 

[Parade_Rain]

Was he a worst signing?

Yes. Did you not see where as soon as Hendry dismissed him, the team won the next 7 of 9? Edwin Jackson wasn't signed to make the Cubs a playoff contender. Bradley was signed to make the Cubs even more competitive than the previous year.

 

[SilenceS]

Yes. Did you not see where as soon as Hendry dismissed him, the team won the next 7 of 9? Edwin Jackson wasn't signed to make the Cubs a playoff contender. Bradley was signed to make the Cubs even more competitive than the previous year.

LOL do you remember when Lou Pinella left the Cubs and the Cubs went on a streak with Mike Quade. LOL 7 of 9. lol

 

[Parade_Rain]

LOL do you remember when Lou Pinella left the Cubs and the Cubs went on a streak with Mike Quade. LOL 7 of 9. lol

The fanboys still want to ignore that he was dismissed from the team early because he hated the fans, he hated Chicago and he hated the entire Cubs organization.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Edwin Jackson was directly signed as a panic move because Anibal Sanchez played Theo like a fiddle to get more money out of Detroit.

That's true to an extent. I don't know that it was panic but he wanted a reliable arm in the rotation for a rebuilding team and when he didn't get his first choice signed Jackson who had been that for 5 years prior to the signing with a FIP in the mid 3's. He wasn't even awful the first year of the deal, the wheels really fell off in 2014. The signing didn't work out but I thought it was decent at the time for what it was.

 

[SilenceS]

The fanboys still want to ignore that he was dismissed from the team early because he hated the fans, he hated Chicago and he hated the entire Cubs organization.

Where did I dismiss that? He was booed in like his 3rd game for the Cubs. He def. hated Chicago and the fans hated him. He was traded. Edwin Jackson sucked and was traded before his contract was up. Each were bad contracts signed by two different GM's

 

[CSF77]

Edwin Jackson was directly signed as a panic move because Anibal was Sanchez played Theo like a fiddle to get more money out of Detroit.

What is to learn about this. And signing MB after the 2008 fold. Don't make knee jerk reaction decisions.

How Hendry handled 2007 was far better. Build the team first. 2008 the trade for Harden sucked in hindsight but at the time they needed a starter and Harden was putting up TOR numbers.

The fold in 2008 was not caused by a lack of LH bats. It was caused by simple momentum. The Cubs clinched a week early and rested up their regulars. The other teams played hot until the end and had to fight to get in. Simple reality here.

 

[SilenceS]

That's true to an extent. I don't know that it was panic but he wanted a reliable arm in the rotation for a rebuilding team and when he didn't get his first choice signed Jackson who had been that for 5 years prior to the signing with a FIP in the mid 3's. He wasn't even awful the first year of the deal, the wheels really fell off in 2014. The signing didn't work out but I thought it was decent at the time for what it was.

"Given the situation, I think we could have been more patient," Epstein said. "We could have been more in line with the plan. That said, when there is no pitching you have to find pitching.

"I was being self-critical. Anytime you make an investment that doesn't immediately pay off, especially when you don't have tremendous freedom to make a variety of significant investments, you should be hard on yourself."

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/20500/epstein-admits-to-mistakes-in-rebuilding

The point is I am not knocking Theo. I am trying to show that bad signings happen. People like to put more emphasis on Hendry for some reason.

 

[SilenceS]

What is to learn about this. And signing MB after the 2008 fold. Don't make knee jerk reaction decisions.

How Hendry handled 2007 was far better. Build the team first. 2008 the trade for Harden sucked in hindsight but at the time they needed a starter and Harden was putting up TOR numbers.

The fold in 2008 was not caused by a lack of LH bats. It was caused by simple momentum. The Cubs clinched a week early and rested up their regulars. The other teams played hot until the end and had to fight to get in. Simple reality here.

I agree. He was under pressure to win and the owners and fans were screaming for a left handed bat. The funny part is people forget they were pissed at him for trading Derosa and that turned out to be a good move. Derosa did nothing the rest of his career and the cubs got Archer. Hindsight, I wish we would have kept him but it did get us Garza who was far more productive than Derosa during that span. The problem was the Cubs were going down and Hendry was trying to keep a sinking ship afloat.

 

[DanTown]

Not sure what you're expecting. This wasn't a declarative statement that Alcantara some how is now a MLB level all-star. It was simply suggesting that after a horrible start he's played significantly better over the past 2 weeks.

Sure he's played better but WHY is more important. Was he having bad luck the first stretch? Good luck now? It's incredibly hard to scout a guy when the only drastic change is his BABIP and identify what's he's doing.

I'm not saying he hasn't made changes and adjustments but just posting cherry picked stats doesn't prove shit about what you think he'll be.

Also FWIW, I'm not even sure you can draw much from the minor leagues to begin with unless your physically going to all the games. Video can be quite shoddy to compare and even some of the more basic things metric wise aren't there for the minor leagues... at least to the public.

There are certain things I think you can grab from AAA and evaluate with the use of video. For a hitter, I'd say their K rate speaks to how much contact they're making. BB rate speaks to their ability to tell balls/strikes. Slugging obviously is a little luck based but it's hard to get lucky and slug a ton. I rarely would judge a minor league hitter based on their batting average because of how big some parks are, how questionable the fielders are, how much less advanced scouting goes into AAA than MLB, and the pitching is just not on the same level for the most part.

That being said, my guess is that the cubs have been doing their organizational push which they've done on most players which is to not swing at anything that isn't a pitch you can hit hard with Alcantara and he likely struggled with it. That would explain why his walk rate skyrocketed as well as his K rate. I read something recently about Almora also struggling with the concept at first in that he thought they just wanted him to walk more and it messed with his game rather than what they actually want which is for players to find pitches they can drive rather than swinging at anything in the zone.

Whether or not Alcantara is actually getting the concept now and making it work for him we'll see. As I mentioned his K rate is still too high for the player he needs to be.

You're missing the overall point: you picked a completely arbitrary number in terms of Alcantra's plate appearances to make the widest split possible with there being no significant reason for the split you chose. I have no problem with your assessment EXCEPT for the data set you chose.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

"Given the situation, I think we could have been more patient," Epstein said. "We could have been more in line with the plan. That said, when there is no pitching you have to find pitching.

"I was being self-critical. Anytime you make an investment that doesn't immediately pay off, especially when you don't have tremendous freedom to make a variety of significant investments, you should be hard on yourself."

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/20500/epstein-admits-to-mistakes-in-rebuilding

The point is I am not knocking Theo. I am trying to show that bad signings happen. People like to put more emphasis on Hendry for some reason.

I've heard Theo talk about and there is no way to parse the Jackson signing in any other way than that it was bad. They could have been more thorough. My only point was that they didn't sign a bad pitcher, he got bad after they signed him but bad or not the teams he played on were never going to be good. Hendry signed a bad guy coming off of a great season while trying to win.

I don't hate Hendry and he made some good moves, trading for Aramis Ramirez was brilliant, but the Cubs teams in his tenure were mostly un-enjoyable even when they were winning. The Piniella teams weren't unlikable like the Baker teams were but they never seemed like they had much fun playing either and the teams were not deep. I get that it was organization as a whole that was to plain but rightly or wrongly Hendry was the face of that.

 

[CSF77]

I agree. He was under pressure to win and the owners and fans were screaming for a left handed bat. The funny part is people forget they were pissed at him for trading Derosa and that turned out to be a good move. Derosa did nothing the rest of his career and the cubs got Archer. Hindsight, I wish we would have kept him but it did get us Garza who was far more productive than Derosa during that span. The problem was the Cubs were going down and Hendry was trying to keep a sinking ship afloat.

Good point. That deal lost Hendry his job though. Gave up farm talent to save his job. Came up short and Garza ended up trade bait anyways.

What are you going to do? Anyways it kinda makes you look at the current system and want to hold the deck more unless you are getting something huge in return. You never know if these lower level kids have that star potential and another scout sees it and the Cubs don't.

 

[CSF77]

I've heard Theo talk about and there is no way to parse the Jackson signing in any other way than that it was bad. They could have been more thorough. My only point was that they didn't sign a bad pitcher, he got bad after they signed him but bad or not the teams he played on were never going to be good. Hendry signed a bad guy coming off of a great season while trying to win.

I don't hate Hendry and he made some good moves, trading for Aramis Ramirez was brilliant, but the Cubs teams in his tenure were mostly un-enjoyable even when they were winning. The Piniella teams weren't unlikable like the Baker teams were but they never seemed like they had much fun playing either and the teams were not deep. I get that it was organization as a whole that was to plain but rightly or wrongly Hendry was the face of that.

I believe Jackson's splits in Wrigg were just crap going into that deal. It was a knee jerk reaction for sure because that should have been part of the evaluation process.

I see it as they wanted to build good PR after wrecking the team and Sanchez did not want to headline a losing product. So Jackson was a knee jerk reaction after the fact to save face. And then it blows up in their face.

Pretty bad but after that most deals have been advantageous to the team. If anything year 1 was crap. Jackson was crap but the rest pretty much turned the Cubs into what they are today so it is almost a blip in a 5 year window vs the 5 year mess with a few blips of good going on.

Edit: Rizzo was solid year 1. So guess he outweighed the rest of the mistakes.

 

[DanTown]

Good point. That deal lost Hendry his job though. Gave up farm talent to save his job. Came up short and Garza ended up trade bait anyways.

What are you going to do? Anyways it kinda makes you look at the current system and want to hold the deck more unless you are getting something huge in return. You never know if these lower level kids have that star potential and another scout sees it and the Cubs don't.

The Garza deal was somewhat defensible but it wasn't even the worst trade Jim ever did. The Pierre deal to me was the worst deal he ever did and made me question how many of his moves were basically the ownership (first the Wrigley group then Zell) demanding that the Cubs win today to sell the team?

This franchise was so poorly run for decades it's amazing how much Theo has changed the culture in just five years.

 

[beckdawg]

I'm not saying he hasn't made changes and adjustments but just posting cherry picked stats doesn't prove shit about what you think he'll be.

Here's your problem..... you're assuming I was trying to prove anything. I was just pointing out he was playing better.

There are certain things I think you can grab from AAA and evaluate with the use of video. For a hitter, I'd say their K rate speaks to how much contact they're making. BB rate speaks to their ability to tell balls/strikes. Slugging obviously is a little luck based but it's hard to get lucky and slug a ton. I rarely would judge a minor league hitter based on their batting average because of how big some parks are, how questionable the fielders are, how much less advanced scouting goes into AAA than MLB, and the pitching is just not on the same level for the most part.

I mean I agree but you're suggesting I should have proved something with regard to Alcantara. I can sit here and say his walk rate is up and his K rate is down from the start of the season if I were attempting to prove something but that really doesn't tell you what is happening. It tells you the outcome. Is he seeing the ball better? Is he just not swinging at pitches? The "why" is missing. So when I'm saying they lack the proper metrics, I'm suggesting things like batted ball data, pitch fx and pitch data of what was in the zone and so forth.

You're missing the overall point: you picked a completely arbitrary number in terms of Alcantra's plate appearances to make the widest split possible with there being no significant reason for the split you chose. I have no problem with your assessment EXCEPT for the data set you chose.

I did nothing of the sort. I picked a 50 PA sample size narrowed to the nearest game. I chose 50 PAs because it's half what you'd normally accept as the lowest starting point for it being real and not just a hot streak so that it is something you can keep an eye on if you're so inclined. If i wanted to make it the best he could have possibly looked I could have done better.

 

[Parade_Rain]

I've heard Theo talk about and there is no way to parse the Jackson signing in any other way than that it was bad. They could have been more thorough. My only point was that they didn't sign a bad pitcher, he got bad after they signed him but bad or not the teams he played on were never going to be good. Hendry signed a bad guy coming off of a great season while trying to win.

I don't hate Hendry and he made some good moves, trading for Aramis Ramirez was brilliant, but the Cubs teams in his tenure were mostly un-enjoyable even when they were winning. The Piniella teams weren't unlikable like the Baker teams were but they never seemed like they had much fun playing either and the teams were not deep. I get that it was organization as a whole that was to plain but rightly or wrongly Hendry was the face of that.

Didn't Hendry hire Fleita?