Cub's Prospect Watch And Development Discussion Thread

[brett05]

That being said, I'd play Baez at 3B regardless unless they want to give him a few years at SS before he moves a la A-Rod and other hit first SS.

For the record, he was moved to 3b to not upset Jeter. He was the superior defensive SS when he played with Derek.

 

[beckdawg]

For the record, he was moved to 3b to not upset Jeter. He was the superior defensive SS when he played with Derek.

Well in his case yes. However, Ripken moved to 3B as he aged and others have too. It often happens prior to promotion. Machado was a SS all the way up in the minors until called up IIRC. Chipper Jones was a SS for a long while in the minors. I'm sure there's multiple more examples but those that come to mind.

 

[brett05]

Well in his case yes. However, Ripken moved to 3B as he aged and others have too. It often happens prior to promotion. Machado was a SS all the way up in the minors until called up IIRC. Chipper Jones was a SS for a long while in the minors. I'm sure there's multiple more examples but those that come to mind.

True but neither Baez or Castro will be considered old for quite some time

 

[beckdawg]

True but neither Baez or Castro will be considered old for quite some time

And Chipper and Machado weren't old when they moved to 3B. My reasoning here is pretty simple. Moving Baez to 3B forces Bryant to the outfield. Bryant in RF is likely a better defensive value than at 3B given what we've seen thus far. Some people believe he can stick there. However, at 6'5 he is pretty giant for the position. And the way he hits how long do you really want to worry about him playing 3B in the minors? At some point soon you have to call him up. And then you're talking about having him learn in games that actually matter. I mean not many people get fired over a AAA team losing games. The additional benefit here is that Baez at 3B has SS tool set that made a guy like Chipper a pretty decent defensive 3B. Most years he was above the average for the position. So, if Baez is poor to average at SS and average to above average at 3B he too is an upgrade like Bryant would be in a corner outfield position.

It's also the easiest transition in my opinion. Rather than having to put Alcantara in the OF which he's never really done, you're putting Bryant in the OF which he played some in college and his college coach suggested he could be a gold glove caliber player there. Alcantara can stay doing what he's been doing. Baez moves over 20-30 feet but he's still seeing balls from the left side of the infield which he is used to. It also means that you don't have to screw with Castro if you don't want to. But, it also leaves open a window that if someone like Gleyber Torres(#2 IFA last year) continues to rake that there will be a position for him. Also, if the day comes that you do trade Castro, you're in a position where you can find a Brendan Ryan or whomever this generations version of him is. He can come in and just play defense. You tend to end up with power hitters with low average at 3B vs decent average/OBP with no power guys at SS. You can pick up someone like Yunel Escobar who's a decent on base guy and plays solid defense. That's all you need.

People get this idea that because A-Rod/Nomar/Hanley/Jeter...etc were offensive threats that you need that. I grew up in St. Louis during the 80's. So, I have first hand knowledge of how those Cardinal teams ran. You're talking about Ozzie Smith who was a career .262/.337/.328 with 28 career HRs and some decent speed. In the time he was there, they won fewer than 79 games twice(88,90) before they crashed in 93. But by that point he was 38. They went to 3 world series with him there. Now you may say, the game has changed. Has it? League average ERA last year was 3.87. It's 3.79 this year. Do you know what it was in 1982 when Ozzie arrived? 3.86 and was basically sub-4 for most of the decade. Since steroids crumbled we're talking about an 80's game not a late-90's/2000's game.

Perhaps I'm just sentimental for my youth but those teams did 3 things. #1 they played great defense. #2 they ran like crazy stealing 314 bases in 1985. The top 3 teams in the NL stole 374 last year. #3 They got on base. In 1982, they lead the NL in OBP at .334. Incidentally, that same year they were last in HRs. Ok well technically 4 things because they won shit load of games too.

 

[Parade_Rain]

I like that idea. It also puts Alcantara at 2B.

 

[brett05]

And Chipper and Machado weren't old when they moved to 3B. My reasoning here is pretty simple. Moving Baez to 3B forces Bryant to the outfield. Bryant in RF is likely a better defensive value than at 3B given what we've seen thus far. Some people believe he can stick there. However, at 6'5 he is pretty giant for the position. And the way he hits how long do you really want to worry about him playing 3B in the minors? At some point soon you have to call him up. And then you're talking about having him learn in games that actually matter. I mean not many people get fired over a AAA team losing games. The additional benefit here is that Baez at 3B has SS tool set that made a guy like Chipper a pretty decent defensive 3B. Most years he was above the average for the position. So, if Baez is poor to average at SS and average to above average at 3B he too is an upgrade like Bryant would be in a corner outfield position.

It's also the easiest transition in my opinion. Rather than having to put Alcantara in the OF which he's never really done, you're putting Bryant in the OF which he played some in college and his college coach suggested he could be a gold glove caliber player there. Alcantara can stay doing what he's been doing. Baez moves over 20-30 feet but he's still seeing balls from the left side of the infield which he is used to. It also means that you don't have to screw with Castro if you don't want to. But, it also leaves open a window that if someone like Gleyber Torres(#2 IFA last year) continues to rake that there will be a position for him. Also, if the day comes that you do trade Castro, you're in a position where you can find a Brendan Ryan or whomever this generations version of him is. He can come in and just play defense. You tend to end up with power hitters with low average at 3B vs decent average/OBP with no power guys at SS. You can pick up someone like Yunel Escobar who's a decent on base guy and plays solid defense. That's all you need.

People get this idea that because A-Rod/Nomar/Hanley/Jeter...etc were offensive threats that you need that. I grew up in St. Louis during the 80's. So, I have first hand knowledge of how those Cardinal teams ran. You're talking about Ozzie Smith who was a career .262/.337/.328 with 28 career HRs and some decent speed. In the time he was there, they won fewer than 79 games twice(88,90) before they crashed in 93. But by that point he was 38. They went to 3 world series with him there. Now you may say, the game has changed. Has it? League average ERA last year was 3.87. It's 3.79 this year. Do you know what it was in 1982 when Ozzie arrived? 3.86 and was basically sub-4 for most of the decade. Since steroids crumbled we're talking about an 80's game not a late-90's/2000's game.

Perhaps I'm just sentimental for my youth but those teams did 3 things. #1 they played great defense. #2 they ran like crazy stealing 314 bases in 1985. The top 3 teams in the NL stole 374 last year. #3 They got on base. In 1982, they lead the NL in OBP at .334. Incidentally, that same year they were last in HRs. Ok well technically 4 things because they won shit load of games too.

I'm not disagreeing with the logic as it relates to the Cubs. Just the examples aren't relevant. Take the Braves. They already had a good fielding young SS in Jeff Blauser. No real need to get Chipper there so they looked for a position for him. Same with the Orioles. They already had JJ Hardy so they move Machado to 3b, he becomes an instant GG there and thus no reason to move him anywhere.

 

[brett05]

Eh... I don't know. Do people read anything there? I kinda of like more of a discussion rather than just writing things. While I clearly can write novels, it's usually triggered by something I see that leads me down a path of thought. I doubt I'd just decided to write something without having being prompted by some idea. With regard to the prospect thing I did, cubs den had just put out it's revised lists and I was curious where people were stats wise. So, I was likely going to look at the stuff myself anyways and by writing it down I sort of get some memory to some of these names. For example, it wasn't until I did the one before the season that Alcantara popped out to me as a potential star. I mean I knew he was good but until I dug into the stats I didn't realize how good. Similar with Schwarber this year.

The front page brings in traffic. The on the inside you have a link or your passage quoted for a thread discussion. I think you really should consider it. In fact I may put a thread poll up to see what everyone else thinks.

 

[SilenceS]

People are way overthinking defensive positioning. If they hit, they will find a place. Look at Pujols, he went from third to left to first base. Why? Because his bat overcame any position problems. If the bat plays, teams will stick players anywhere for the time being and deal with it later.

 

[SilenceS]

Another one, Ryan Braun. He went from third to left to right. Why? Because his bat overcomes any defensive problems.

 

[SilenceS]

Either way the comments I made are still relevant. Nomar was a bad defender at that point in his career. They did add a better defensive shortstop with better speed. They were 56-46(.549) at the trade deadline. They finished 98-64(.605) which means they finished the season 42-18(.700) after the trade. Whether it was an intended consequence or not really doesn't matter.

What? I am not following here. Nomar would have never been traded if he and the FO and ownership didnt hate each other. They were trying to do a blockbuster the year before and it fell through. It pissed him off and he basically packed it in. The article even states that those two players were better then Nomar not playing. That was the problem. Nomar had no desire to play for Boston anymore, so they traded him. Nothing to do with talent or he was expendable. It was more of a necessity for a playoff race. Castro packs it in then by all means trade him. But, as of right now, the dude is working his ass off and it is paying off. He came into camp in the best shape of his life. They said his body is maturing right now and you can see it. He is filling out. No player is untouchable for the right things, but I would never trade Castro unless it was for a TOR starter already in the league. Not a maybe prospect. Not a package of prospects. You would have to get back true major league talent.

 

[SilenceS]

Castro looks so good because the talent around him is so bad.

His OBA is .334. His SLG is .470. Sure good when you put it up against other SS but pretty much not game changing stats. It is still making an out 2/3's of the time.

I suggest people look at wOBA more. It gives better insight. Castro wOBA is over .350. He also has an OPS+ of 119 which is good for 52nd in the entire league and right behind such names as Josh Donaldson, Brett Gardner. Also, ahead of such names as Chase Utley, Pablo Sandavol, Albert Pujols, Matt Kemp, Matt Carpenter, Jayson Werth, David Wright, Yadier Molina, Dustin Pedroia, . Even if you take him out of the SS equation. He is still hitting quite well.

Oh and this is for Brett, remember how you said any team in the league would take Alexei over Castro this year. Yea, Castro beat him as well in almost all categories.

 

[CSF77]

So I was thinking. Castro seems to have lost some range at SS.

Now looking at this logically:

Baez needs to focus on adapting to mlb pitching.

Alacantara same.

Castro is adapted.

So in view of these facts why not move Castro to 3B. Just a thought. He had the arm for it.

Now the hang up would be moving Bryant to RF while they have $$$ committed to Soler to play there. As it is Soler is getting paid well to play err rehab in AA.

Just a thought.

But my opinion is Baez has a higher ceiling than Castro. He may or may not have success but it would be better to just let him focus on hitting vs focus on a new position and hitting MLB pitching.

 

[JP Hochbaum]

You don't want to move anyone until you have to move them. We have a prospect field made of great hitters, with the expectation that their hitting will outweigh their average fielding.

Shortstops can play anywhere on the field outside of pitcher and catcher, so not worried where Castro or Baez end up.

Bryant deserves a chance to pan pout at 3B before even thinking of moving him. Plus we have a glut of young outfielders coming up in Soler, Almora, Lake, Schwarber, Alcantara, etc.....

 

[TL1961]

He's not a four. I really see his numbers piwer wise dropping a ton once he's in a more natural batting slot

This makes little to no sense.

 

[TL1961]

Can I ask a semi-relevant question? Is Ian Desmond a tradeable player? Desmond hit .280/.331/.453 last year with 6.6%/22.1% bb/k rate a .341 wOBA and 20 homers 21 SBs and 4.4 UZR/150. Thus far that's been the peak of his career WAR wise and he is a career .269/.314/.431 hitter.

I'm guessing at least a few of you would say yes at the right price. The reason I ask is to remove the home-tinted glasses here. Castro's projected season this year is .288/.334/.470 with 5.7%/17.6% bb/k rate, a .350 wOBA and 21 homers, 2 SBs and a -9.4 UZR/150 and is a career .283/.323/.412 hitter. In any objective conversation the 2013 Ian Desmond is better than this current Castro because he has more speed, plays better defense and is as good of a hitter. The only thing Castro has going for him is he is 24 compared to Desmond who was 27. However, are those additional years really going to make Castro a better player and if so how?

Desmond was called up at 23 and had 1849 PAs before last year. Castro was called up at 20 and had 2617 PAs prior to this season. So, there's no more of the young kid jitters. By now they are worked out. Castro isn't going to start stealing more bases. In fact the opposite has happened. He's stopped. While that doesn't really matter I'm just saying he's not adding value there. Castro appears to have already added the power that often comes with age. So, I don't think that's another area he can improve. I mean he's not seriously going to hit more than 25+ HRs right? He really hasn't shown any measurable improvement defensively. His -9.4 UZR/150 is the worst of his career and specifically the range portion of it has decreased from a positive to a negative. That sort of goes in line with the steals aspect. So, tangibly the only other area that leaves is his average and walk rate. At .288 it seems really unlikely he'll measurably improve his average. I mean he might have a few .300 years down the line but we're not going to see a jump to .320+. And as far as his walk rate, it's identical to his rookie season.

In other words, this is what Castro is for better or worse. As for the question at hand about trading him, if you're going to entertain the idea of trading Shark why wouldn't you at least listen on Castro? Shark arguably does have room to grow and he's been as good if not better as a pitcher which is again, arguably harder to fill. And in the case of Castro, you potentially have a better hitting replacement near ready in Baez where as Shark you're hoping to replace him with the trade returns. This isn't to say you either A) have to trade him a la Shark situation where you're at a contract impasse or B) that you even should or C) even if you do trade him that it has to be today or even this off season. Maybe you are a better team with him. However, what if someone comes and offers you the Hershel Walker trade of baseball? You seriously going to turn down someone being franchise changing stupid for someone who's not even the best player at his position let alone the best player in the league?

Additionally, while Castro is clearly one of the better SS in the league that doesn't necessarily mean he's the best SS for the cubs. For example, some what ironically Theo when with the Red Sox traded Nomar. I don't think anyone can objectively say prior to the trade that Orlando Cabrera was a better SS than Nomar. Nomar was coming off of 7 seasons with the following WAR 6.4, 7.3, 6.3, 7.6, 0.3, 4.8, and 5.7. You're essentially talking MVP caliber player for the beginning of that. Cabrera had a 3.1 WAR season and a 4.4 season prior. However, by that point in his career Nomar was no longer a very good defensive player. Additionally, Cabrera gave the red sox a top of the order hitter with speed rather than a middle of the order hitter that Nomar had been. Remember that team already had Papi and Manny for the heart of the order. However, other than Damon they didn't have much if any speed. With Varitek and Millar they had more than enough power to offset the loss of losing Nomar. And maybe not entirely because of it but they did win the world series that year.

Now how does this pertain to the cubs? If you assume Baez and Bryant are the goods you're going to have 3 great heart of the line up hitters with Rizzo. Alcantara in theory provides you with 20 or so HRs. You also are talking about Schwarber as a possibility, Soler and Almora may have above average power as well. In a some what freaky coincidence what the cubs have almost none of is speed. Almoara isn't going to steal a ton of bases. Alcantara might. Baez can but he'll likely grow more power and lose that speed similar to the way Soriano and A-Rod did. So, I ask the question if that happens then do the cubs really need a 6, 7 or 8 hitter who hits 20 HRs and plays below average defense? Keep in mind that there are currently questions about Baez, Bryant and Alcantara's defensive positions and ultimately effectiveness. And outside of Almora there aren't a ton of guys in the system known for playing amazing defense. So again I ask a question. Would the cubs actually be better off with an Ozzie Guillen type(elite defense meh bat decent speed) who could be plugged into the #1 or #2 holes? An elite defender would mask some of the issues you may have in the infield with Baez/Bryant/Alcantara. It seems like they are going to have a crap ton of offense with or without Castro. Additionally, you presumably would get an elite talent back as part of the trade likely a pitcher.

Ultimately, it's about acquiring the best team not the best players. If that's with Castro, I'm fine with keeping him. However, I think the argument I just made illustrates at least one compelling argument where they are a better team despite getting rid of him.

By the end of this year, Castro is a 24 year-old three-time All Star.

Shark will be a 29 year-old faux ace, with a career win total less than 40. (I know, I know.....wins aren't the measuring stick. Yet, they are, actually.

Shark is Steve Trachsel-like. He'll lose 1-0 and 2-1, but if you score 5 for him in the first, he won't get a win.

 

[CSF77]

He is more talented than Trachel.

I consider him a 2. He is going up against #1 starters.

He is a 2 due to his BB/9. 2.58.

Not bad but not elite.

Hammel runs a 1.84. That is elite

 

[brett05]

This makes little to no sense.

Don't know where you are lost

 

[brett05]

Im not seeing Castro as an AS this year. IIRC he was a replacement in his second appearance

 

[SilenceS]

Im not seeing Castro as an AS this year. IIRC he was a replacement in his second appearance

Your not, whys that? Haney is worse defensively then Castro and there numbers are right on par.

 

[CSF77]

Rizzo deserves it more this year. Better OBA/SLG.