Cub's Prospect Watch And Development Discussion Thread

[SilenceS]

I believe the biggest issues with arms now a days is overuse at a young age. They arent fully developed and it takes a toll on their arm. Where I think teams go wrong in the majors, is they try to reverse that damage by babying them and it turns out to harm them. Pitchers back in the day threw tons of pitches. Now, the league is at an all time high for velocity increases so maybe that has part to do with it.

 

[beckdawg]

I believe the biggest issues with arms now a days is overuse at a young age. They arent fully developed and it takes a toll on their arm. Where I think teams go wrong in the majors, is they try to reverse that damage by babying them and it turns out to harm them. Pitchers back in the day threw tons of pitches. Now, the league is at an all time high for velocity increases so maybe that has part to do with it.

So are you saying they are fine limiting them in the minors but once they are at the majors they should take the handcuffs off a bit? To some extent I can agree with that if that's the case. However, I do like the way the cardinals have worked guys in. They had Wacha throw 85 innings in AAA and then he threw 64 in the bullpen down the stretch. That's around 150 innings which for a young pitcher is pretty reasonable. This year he's probably not going to be limited but if he is it will likely be around the 175 innings Miller pitched last year.

 

[Parade_Rain]

True but the cards have developed pitching well. I mean i personally think teams in general do act very conservative especially when you consider what starters used to do. But, I'm also willing to admit they have a hell of a lot better idea than I do. From what I've read on the issue, it seems to be more the fact that people are pitching year round now which puts more innings on arms than pitchers in the past. If there was less of that then you probably could pitch them more in the minors. However, college coaches in particular may not have a pitchers best interest in mind given that they are always playing for jobs. Also, high school players now often pitch in summer traveling teams and such which AFAIK weren't as big of a thing in the 80's.

Did you ever hear of Legion ball? It went on into mid-late July.

jaegersports.com . . .look at the throwing program. There are a lot of solid pitchers who like it.

 

[SilenceS]

So are you saying they are fine limiting them in the minors but once they are at the majors they should take the handcuffs off a bit? To some extent I can agree with that if that's the case. However, I do like the way the cardinals have worked guys in. They had Wacha throw 85 innings in AAA and then he threw 64 in the bullpen down the stretch. That's around 150 innings which for a young pitcher is pretty reasonable. This year he's probably not going to be limited but if he is it will likely be around the 175 innings Miller pitched last year.

Not minors. I am talking high school and younger. I posted an article some time ago about Dr. James Andrews take on it. He believes that kids are playing ball all year round now and it is hurting their arms. They just keep throwing at a young age and arent fully developed or have the mechanics. This is what he believes is causing the problem when they get older.

An example. Take it with a grain of salt, but while watching my nephew play I saw this coach call for at least 15 curveballs in a game. This kid was 10 years old. No fucking shit. 10 years old. I got into it with him because it was unreal. you do not make a kid that age throw a curveball period. Maybe 1 every once in awhile for fun. The problem is that these coaches want to be playground legends and have no care what happens to these kids future.

I know this is a random example but I have had people tell similar stories. When I grew up, you threw a fastball and changeup and when you got older they limited your breaking balls and we also had a limit on pitches and rest days.

People blame Dusty Baker for Kerry Wood, but I dont think he had anything to do with it. The day after Kerry Wood was drafted his high school coach made him pitch a double header and he threw somewhere in the neighborhood of a 180 pitches. I am sure his arm was abused before that. This is my point.

 

[beckdawg]

Not minors. I am talking high school and younger. I posted an article some time ago about Dr. James Andrews take on it. He believes that kids are playing ball all year round now and it is hurting their arms. They just keep throwing at a young age and arent fully developed or have the mechanics. This is what he believes is causing the problem when they get older.

An example. Take it with a grain of salt, but while watching my nephew play I saw this coach call for at least 15 curveballs in a game. This kid was 10 years old. No fucking shit. 10 years old. I got into it with him because it was unreal. you do not make a kid that age throw a curveball period. Maybe 1 every once in awhile for fun. The problem is that these coaches want to be playground legends and have no care what happens to these kids future.

I know this is a random example but I have had people tell similar stories. When I grew up, you threw a fastball and changeup and when you got older they limited your breaking balls and we also had a limit on pitches and rest days.

People blame Dusty Baker for Kerry Wood, but I dont think he had anything to do with it. The day after Kerry Wood was drafted his high school coach made him pitch a double header and he threw somewhere in the neighborhood of a 180 pitches. I am sure his arm was abused before that. This is my point.

I remember reading something some where might have been cubs den talking about power pitchers who throw 95+ as high schoolers also suffered more because they would often just try to out throw teams in high school. Those players supposedly were more likely to get injured than guys who get older and stronger and add mph's to their fastball because of it since those players learn to pitch more than relying on stuff.

This next part's not solely directed at you Silence I'm just sayin'

I mean I'm not saying either way is definitively right. But, if you look at a player like Shark who took a few years off because of football you see someone who's not had arm issues. So, if teams want to limit players in the minors because they think it's for the player betterment then I'm fine with it. At the end of the day, those minor league games don't matter. So, if you only need 50 innings at every level below AA and AAA and say 100 at each of those to be ready for the majors that's fine in my opinion. That's what something like 350-400ish innings in the minors? If that's all they need to get a guy ready great. I don't see how throwing say 100-150 per level really changes that and it's obviously a potential risk every time you throw.

As for the majors, if you think it's going to make someone have more longevity I have no issue with 100 pitch count limits. If it's the playoffs and you want to let a guy go deeper I'm fine with that too. But people fail to realize how even minor pitching injuries can hurt a team. If you have a guy who can only throw 100-150 innings that means you're talking about a replacement level player most likely pitching for 70-100 innings instead of him. If there's one aspect of pitching that doesn't get enough talk it is the ability to take your start every time. Now maybe there's better ways of ensuring that and if so I'd be open to other ideas but I'm sure a lot of smart people have looked at this and there's a reasoning behind it.

 

[Parade_Rain]

I would have to go digging for the study, but what matters is pronation vs. supination and not whether it's a FB or curve. To be clear I don't believe in CB before 13. CU is harder to learn and should be the first off speed taught from a development perspective.

 

[beckdawg]

Did you ever hear of Legion ball? It went on into mid-late July.

jaegersports.com . . .look at the throwing program. There are a lot of solid pitchers who like it.

I'm honestly not that familiar with high school inner workings. I had lost interest in baseball when I was in high school. However, assuming the way other sports seem to work everything has gone a bit crazy with the amount of money sports now generate. So, I could be wrong about the amount they pitched but that's why I'm assuming it.

 

[Boobaby1]

People were really criticizing Ramirez? I can see 2010 where he hit .241/.294/.452 but he also had a BABIP 50 points lower than his career marks. I have been critical of Soriano's last couple of years with the cubs. However, that's because his OBP went from ok to poor pretty quickly. Ramirez on the other hand other than 2010 had .360ish OBP most of his time with the cubs.

I honestly don't see any reason why anyone would hate on him. In fact, someone like Theo should in theory have realized he's a piece you can build around. The fact that they didn't is the reason I'm fairly sure ownership made the front office reduce payroll around $25 mil from 2011 to 2012. Ramirez was a pretty consistent .280/.350/.500 type player. Sure he doesn't fit long term into a rebuild but he only signed for 3 years of which this is the third and he's only 36 now. I suppose they had Vitters but he's still not progressed to the majors for any lengthy period and they even moved him off 3B anyways. So, I really see no legit reason the front office would willingly avoid re-signing him unless they had no other choice(eg ownership cut budget).

He was criticized all of the time for his poor starts. They would always say that he was useless because he wasn't helping the Cubs until the weather got warmer, and by then, the Cubs were already in a hole.

I would always correct them and tell them that it is an average, and if you look at his numbers, they were far and away the best numbers any single Cubs player has thrown out there since probably Sandberg. Avg, RBI's, OBP, low K rate and so on.

Also that playoffs weren't held in April or May so if I want him hitting, I want it to be in the latter months of the year.

And as far as Dabs, the quote was directed at some Cubs fans in general, not him directly. I wrapped it but didn't specify (not saying you) in the sentence. :yep:

 

[beckdawg]

He was criticized all of the time for his poor starts. They would always say that he was useless because he wasn't helping the Cubs until the weather got warmer, and by then, the Cubs were already in a hole.

Hmm well i mean he hit .266/.338/.455 in March and April over his career. Obviously that's down from his career marks but that's still not a bad player. If that's a players low point for a season I'll take it every day of the week. Where I had a problem with someone like Soriano for I guess similar reasons to what you're saying is because last year 2 of the first 3 months he hit sub .300 OBP. With someone like Ramirez, even when he slumped he was providing you something but when Soriano was bad last year.... he was REALLY bad even if he could quite literally carry a team when he was good. To me that's the difference when talking about slow starters. That's also why I believe in high OBP players. Even when they aren't hitting they give you something. And while it does average out eventually with Soriano, in the case of the cubs, by the time he was hot the cubs were well out of the race though admittedly that's not all his fault.

I guess I just prefer people with less variance. Not saying a guy has to be as consistent as a clock but if you're an all-star type I hope when you're bad you're average or at worst slightly below league average not a replacement level player. It's one of the things that has impressed me thus far about Bryant. To start the year he wasn't killing it but he was pretty consistently getting 1-2 hits a game.

 

[chibears55]

He was criticized all of the time for his poor starts. They would always say that he was useless because he wasn't helping the Cubs until the weather got warmer, and by then, the Cubs were already in a hole.

im an aram fan but this is why most didn't mind so much that he wasn't resigned...

Ramirez was counted on to be their big RBI producer along with Soriano in 2010 and 2011, so when he failed to produce much of anything offensively in the first couple months it hurt the club in the standings to where they found themselves 10 + games out early..

2010 after 80 games Ramirez 6 HR 23 RBIs cubs record 34-46 11 1/2 GB

2011 After 65 games Ramirez 5 HR 27 RBIS cubs record 26-39 11 GB

I stopped at those point because that when his runs production started to improve...


its great that he ended up with decent numbers at end of season because he had a HOT second half, but it does the team no good in the standings when their top run producer isn't doing his job in the first half of season and they fall out of contention...

I know, what difference did it make with this team the last couple years.. I for one wish he had resigned..
but I believe Aram didn't want to come back and play for a rebuild team and wanted a chance to win elsewhere...

 

[MRubio52]

So are you saying they are fine limiting them in the minors but once they are at the majors they should take the handcuffs off a bit? To some extent I can agree with that if that's the case. However, I do like the way the cardinals have worked guys in. They had Wacha throw 85 innings in AAA and then he threw 64 in the bullpen down the stretch. That's around 150 innings which for a young pitcher is pretty reasonable. This year he's probably not going to be limited but if he is it will likely be around the 175 innings Miller pitched last year.

There are a few things here.

Offense might be down right now, but that's largely due to the power arms and specialization that's been evolving over the past 10 years. Batters today are much better than they were in the heyday of the 300 inning/200 pitch rubber arm guys.

Back in the day pitchers could cruise through the 7-8-9 spots and on really awful teams there were 4 auto outs at the bottom of most lineups. Couple that with the fact that 90 used to be elite level velocity and I think that's the reason why arms don't last as long. You could go for CGSO back then because there was less stress on arms then and the hitters weren't as good. Now, between the high velocity spikes we've seen (avg. FB velo is up by a lot from 1990) and the extreme effectiveness of high leverage platoon relievers I think it's folly to want much more than 110 pitches from a starter in a given start.

I think what might work is a 4 man rotation, with a keen eye on pitch counts. IIRC Rany did a bunch of studies on pitcher abuse and came to the conclusion that 120+ pitches is the red level. So, 4 man rotation with a 110 pitch count I think would result in more innings, and I think that's a workload pitchers can handle.

 

[MRubio52]

Chris Rusin throws the first Iowa Cubs no-hitter in thirty years. Can I get a :fap: gentlemen?

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/st...owa-cubs-first-no-hitter-in-30-years/8812139/

I still kinda think he's bad at pitching tbh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MRubio52]

Tseng or Blackburn for you guys?

Honestly I might put Tseng over Edwards rn. Goddamn I love that arm and frame


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JosMin]

I still kinda think he's bad at pitching tbh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He is.... But it's still exciting. I mean, Edwin Jackson threw a no-no.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[beckdawg]

Tseng or Blackburn for you guys?

Honestly I might put Tseng over Edwards rn. Goddamn I love that arm and frame


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not the expert here but seems like Tseng may have a higher peak. So I guess that's my answer but I'm not going to pretend to be super knowledgeable about lower level prospects especially pitchers in general. I tend to base most of my opinion on stats which at low levels is hard to get enough data and pitchers in particular are generally small sample size.

 

[dabynsky]

Tseng or Blackburn for you guys?

Honestly I might put Tseng over Edwards rn. Goddamn I love that arm and frame


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edwards, Tseng/Johnson, Blackburn was my sense of the order of the top pitching prospects, but I haven't been able to watch Tseng or Blackburn yet. That is completely excluding the wildcard that is Vizcaino at this point. Some other guys that if they can piece it together could shoot up the list but odds seem long (Panguiaga, Maples, Underwood).

 

[dabynsky]

And as far as Dabs, the quote was directed at some Cubs fans in general, not him directly. I wrapped it but didn't specify (not saying you) in the sentence. :yep:

Sorry when I was quoted it felt as though it was directed to me personally. I have spent many, many posts disputing the idea that Aramis Ramirez only produced when it didn't count or that he was somehow lacked that mythic "clutch-ness."

 

[beckdawg]

So, something that hasn't gotten much talk is Baez's fielding. It's been a point of contention in him staying at SS. Thus far he's had 6 errors in 91 chances. That's not quite as good as his AA last year(.948 fielding%) but it's better than his A+ last year(.922). Overall, it's slightly better than his combined 2013(.932 vs .934). You'd like to see him in that .950 range at the least but just as a point of reference Starlin Castro's minor league fielding percentage was .944 with his final two years in AA being in the .950 range. If he had 1 fewer error right now Baez would have a .944. So, as I've long suggested, I think the opinions on his defense might be a tad overstated. He's unlikely to ever be a gold glover but I think he can be as good as Castro.

 

[dabynsky]

So, something that hasn't gotten much talk is Baez's fielding. It's been a point of contention in him staying at SS. Thus far he's had 6 errors in 91 chances. That's not quite as good as his AA last year(.948 fielding%) but it's better than his A+ last year(.922). Overall, it's slightly better than his combined 2013(.932 vs .934). You'd like to see him in that .950 range at the least but just as a point of reference Starlin Castro's minor league fielding percentage was .944 with his final two years in AA being in the .950 range. If he had 1 fewer error right now Baez would have a .944. So, as I've long suggested, I think the opinions on his defense might be a tad overstated. He's unlikely to ever be a gold glover but I think he can be as good as Castro.

As good as Castro is hardly a ringing endorsement of his defense.

 

[beckdawg]

As good as Castro is hardly a ringing endorsement of his defense.

My point wasn't that it was great. My point is that it is passable at SS.