Cubs' Prospects FUTUREBONER thread

[Quality Start Machine]

All it took was a little angst in this corner to get Baez hitting.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

3. Even worst case scenario, that he's overmatched and he's never going to figure this out, the beauty of this whole thing is that, for the first time the entire hopes don't seem to be riding on one guy (See Patterson, Pie) and they can afford for some of these guys to not pan out (as they no doubt will.)  

I feel like this is where we disagree. No, they haven't pinned their hopes on one guy (I don't think the previous regime did either). I just don't think their margin for error is as high as you do. There are some guys in the minors who may turn into nice, cost-effective players early in their career. But they really only have 3-4 guys with truly elite potential.

3-4 guys in the minors. Add in Rizzo and Castro and you're talking about 5-6 potential elite players. 3 of whom play in the middle infield

And, yeah, if given a choice of one of those three MI prospects to flame out, Baez would probably be the last on the list. But that positional depth does go some way towards calming me down in the face of his current scuffling.

And given how barren the current major-league roster is, they pretty much need them all to pan out on some level. Having just 1-2 of those guys pan out isn't going to be enough if they stick to this all-homegrown approach for a few more years.

If they stick to the homegrown approach. The extent to which they do so, though, probably depends largely on how well the kids pan out.

I don't think anyone doubts that there will be holes to be filled down the line (some likely filled by some of those cost-effective low-ceiling/high-floor non-elite types). But that's a cross-that-bridge-when-we-get-there situation, no?

But we want a contender now

Or maybe just within roughly half a decade of them taking control?

We agree then....but so you're fairly confident they won't be contending in 2 years--this being 7 weeks into Year 3?  I'm not certain they'll be a contender but I also haven't seen anything in their progression up to date that would scream "no" either.  

[J. Walter Weatherman]

3. Even worst case scenario, that he's overmatched and he's never going to figure this out, the beauty of this whole thing is that, for the first time the entire hopes don't seem to be riding on one guy (See Patterson, Pie) and they can afford for some of these guys to not pan out (as they no doubt will.)  

I feel like this is where we disagree. No, they haven't pinned their hopes on one guy (I don't think the previous regime did either). I just don't think their margin for error is as high as you do. There are some guys in the minors who may turn into nice, cost-effective players early in their career. But they really only have 3-4 guys with truly elite potential.

3-4 guys in the minors. Add in Rizzo and Castro and you're talking about 5-6 potential elite players. 3 of whom play in the middle infield

And, yeah, if given a choice of one of those three MI prospects to flame out, Baez would probably be the last on the list. But that positional depth does go some way towards calming me down in the face of his current scuffling.

And given how barren the current major-league roster is, they pretty much need them all to pan out on some level. Having just 1-2 of those guys pan out isn't going to be enough if they stick to this all-homegrown approach for a few more years.

If they stick to the homegrown approach. The extent to which they do so, though, probably depends largely on how well the kids pan out.

I don't think anyone doubts that there will be holes to be filled down the line (some likely filled by some of those cost-effective low-ceiling/high-floor non-elite types). But that's a cross-that-bridge-when-we-get-there situation, no?

But we want a contender now

Or maybe just within roughly half a decade of them taking control?

FWe agree then....but so you're fairly confident they won't be contending in 2 years--this being 7 weeks into Year 3?  I'm not certain they'll be a contender but I also haven't seen anything in their progression up to date that would scream "no" either. 

Wash, rinse, repeat.

[R-V]

All it took was a little angst in this corner to get Baez hitting.

Or he has night blindness and will walk off a pier and drown at some point.

Javier Baez, SS, Cubs (Triple-A Iowa)
After a dominating run across two levels in 2013, Baez was a darling of the offseason prospect hype machine, and when he arrived in camp this spring and continued the onslaught I agreed to name all offspring I might create in the future after him. But 2014 hasn't gone as planned for the 21-year-old, and we are nearing the point in the season where the sample size is significant enough to validate the concerns about his offensive struggles. As previously documented, Baez is an extremely reactionary, see-ball/hit-ball hitter, the type who looks to attack and drive fastballs out of the park and struggles to make adjustments to off-speed offerings. These approach tendencies have been magnified this year by a larger dose of quality secondary stuff, and when Baez takes the bait and loses the count, his OPS is 500 points lower than it is when he can work himself into more friendly fastball situations.

Another twist in this developmental tale is Baez's extreme day/night splits, as the high-ceiling slugger has a sub-.200 slugging percentage under the artificial lights, with a batting average that has now dropped below the .100 mark. If vision is the culprit, and Baez is struggling to locate and diagnose the ball early out of the pitcher's hand, this could present a terminal developmental outcome when paired with existing approach concerns. It's still early in the season, and the realities of the vision issues are still more speculative than anything else, but we are nearing the point where concerns can solidify and realistic outcomes can start to be questioned. I'm still blinded by his bat speed and therefore optimistic that his future will be abnormal and franchise altering. But the neurological aspects of his struggles are trying to pull me off the Baez bus with each passing day. –Jason Parks

[Eli]

We agree then....but so you're fairly confident they won't be contending in 2 years--this being 7 weeks into Year 3?  I'm not certain they'll be a contender but I also haven't seen anything in their progression up to date that would scream "no" either.  

I guess it's a little tough to judge since "contention" is vague. Do we mean a team hovering around .500 that quasi-hangs in the race through August? Or are we talking a top-5, 95-win sort of team?

It probably wouldn't be too hard to reach the first one even next year with a few good moves this winter and simply some better luck, as run differential may hint. But the second seems more distant to me. I don't think it's impossible, but they'd have to drastically shift how they're approaching trades and free agency. Maybe they will and I'm just lacking in imagination of how they'll accomplish it.

Just curious, since we're talking dates, at what point would other people around here start to get a little restless (if you're not already)? It's pretty easy to keep kicking the can down the road and say "give it just another year or two." It's already happened once, since 2014 was probably the most frequently cited timeline when Theo/Jed were hired.

[Slaky]

We agree then....but so you're fairly confident they won't be contending in 2 years--this being 7 weeks into Year 3?  I'm not certain they'll be a contender but I also haven't seen anything in their progression up to date that would scream "no" either.  

I guess it's a little tough to judge since "contention" is vague. Do we mean a team hovering around .500 that quasi-hangs in the race through August? Or are we talking a top-5, 95-win sort of team?

It probably wouldn't be too hard to reach the first one even next year with a few good moves this winter and simply some better luck, as run differential may hint. But the second seems more distant to me. I don't think it's impossible, but they'd have to drastically shift how they're approaching trades and free agency. Maybe they will and I'm just lacking in imagination of how they'll accomplish it.

Just curious, since we're talking dates, at what point would other people around here start to get a little restless (if you're not already)? It's pretty easy to keep kicking the can down the road and say "give it just another year or two." It's already happened once, since 2014 was probably the most frequently cited timeline when Theo/Jed were hired.

I think if they are top 5 worst record in baseball at this time NEXT year and we've got 1 or 2 of the big four up and let's say no significant roster acquisitions in the offseason I'm panicking.

If they're hovering around 3 or fewer games out of first or a wild card in May next year looking like they can make a push, I'm feeling very good.

The hard thing to remember is that this organization, as any good organization, values process over results. You can get lucky and win a fair amount of games. The idea is to win a bunch of games because you're good enough.

Sustainability not a year where everything comes together.

It sucks but it's the right thing to do.

[R-V]

We agree then....but so you're fairly confident they won't be contending in 2 years--this being 7 weeks into Year 3?  I'm not certain they'll be a contender but I also haven't seen anything in their progression up to date that would scream "no" either.  

I guess it's a little tough to judge since "contention" is vague. Do we mean a team hovering around .500 that quasi-hangs in the race through August? Or are we talking a top-5, 95-win sort of team?

It probably wouldn't be too hard to reach the first one even next year with a few good moves this winter and simply some better luck, as run differential may hint. But the second seems more distant to me. I don't think it's impossible, but they'd have to drastically shift how they're approaching trades and free agency. Maybe they will and I'm just lacking in imagination of how they'll accomplish it.

Just curious, since we're talking dates, at what point would other people around here start to get a little restless (if you're not already)? It's pretty easy to keep kicking the can down the road and say "give it just another year or two." It's already happened once, since 2014 was probably the most frequently cited timeline when Theo/Jed were hired.

I think if they are top 5 worst record in baseball at this time NEXT year and we've got 1 or 2 of the big four up and let's say no significant roster acquisitions in the offseason I'm panicking.

If they're hovering around 3 or fewer games out of first or a wild card in May next year looking like they can make a push, I'm feeling very good.

The hard thing to remember is that this organization, as any good organization, values process over results. You can get lucky and win a fair amount of games. The idea is to win a bunch of games because you're good enough.

Sustainability not a year where everything comes together.

It sucks but it's the right thing to do.

This. I expect a winning record next year. If it doesn't happen I'll be sad.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

We agree then....but so you're fairly confident they won't be contending in 2 years--this being 7 weeks into Year 3?  I'm not certain they'll be a contender but I also haven't seen anything in their progression up to date that would scream "no" either.  

I guess it's a little tough to judge since "contention" is vague. Do we mean a team hovering around .500 that quasi-hangs in the race through August? Or are we talking a top-5, 95-win sort of team?

It probably wouldn't be too hard to reach the first one even next year with a few good moves this winter and simply some better luck, as run differential may hint. But the second seems more distant to me. I don't think it's impossible, but they'd have to drastically shift how they're approaching trades and free agency. Maybe they will and I'm just lacking in imagination of how they'll accomplish it.

Just curious, since we're talking dates, at what point would other people around here start to get a little restless (if you're not already)? It's pretty easy to keep kicking the can down the road and say "give it just another year or two." It's already happened once, since 2014 was probably the most frequently cited timeline when Theo/Jed were hired.

I'll be honest, the bad baseball at the major league is starting to wear on me; I keep repeating my mantra that they're on the right path but it's not always easy to maintain that faith so it's not like I don't understand where you're coming from.  Still, I don't see myself jumping ship--even if they lose 100 games-- at any point this season but yeah--if Baez doesn't get untracked all season I may start to sour (but I still think Baez'll be just fine).

[Eli]

This. I expect a winning record next year. If it doesn't happen I'll be sad.

This seems reasonable.

I'll be honest, the bad baseball at the major league is starting to wear on me; I keep repeating my mantra that they're on the right path but it's not always easy to maintain that faith so it's not like I don't understand where you're coming from.  Still, I don't see myself jumping ship--even if they lose 100 games-- at any point this season but yeah--if Baez doesn't get untracked all season I may start to sour (but I still think Baez'll be just fine).

So does this.

I think the run differential this year gives me hope things aren't quite as bad as they appear. They're still almost certainly one of the 5 worst teams in baseball, but probably not the worst. If they can be above/around .500 next year and then actually compete* in 2016, I'll gladly admit I was wrong about their timeline. I'll probably remain skeptical that it HAD to take so long, but I'll try to keep that grumbling to myself.

* Not exactly sure what to define that as since luck can cause such variance either way, as Slaky said. But I'll arbitrarily say 90 wins, since that usually is good enough for top 10 in baseball.

[PenFoe]

.500 in 2015 and 90 wins in 2016 feel pretty unrealistic to me (though I hope I'm wrong.)

I'm expecting more along the lines of:
2014: 65-97
2015: 72-90
2016: 81-81
2017+: Playoffs/legit contender

[Slaky]

.500 in 2015 and 90 wins in 2016 feel pretty unrealistic to me (though I hope I'm wrong.)

I'm expecting more along the lines of:
2014: 65-97
2015: 72-90
2016: 81-81
2017+: Playoffs/legit contender

Yours is a much more pessimistic view, I think.

It might come to pass that way and if so, I think a lot of people are going to be furious.

If the run differential hovers around where it is or even somehow improves I think the large win total jump that rarely happens year to year becomes a possibility for 2015. I don't ever want to place my hopes in the hands of luck but the idea is that in 2015 you have a team that can play .500 ball and if they just can even out in the luck dept. suddenly you're a wild card contender.

[Eli]

.500 in 2015 and 90 wins in 2016 feel pretty unrealistic to me (though I hope I'm wrong.)

I'm expecting more along the lines of:
2014: 65-97
2015: 72-90
2016: 81-81
2017+: Playoffs/legit contender

Yours is a much more pessimistic view, I think.

It might come to pass that way and if so, I think a lot of people are going to be furious.

I think people would be furious and rightfully so. That means Theo would actually need a contract extension to see that first contending team. If people had been told back in 2011 it'd take him 6 offseasons to put together a winning team, I don't know if anyone would have wanted him hired. Obviously the ownership situation will have played into things some, but casting blame aside, that'd be a pretty disappointing outcome.

But again, I think Pen's view is definitely a more pessimistic one.

[PenFoe]

.500 in 2015 and 90 wins in 2016 feel pretty unrealistic to me (though I hope I'm wrong.)

I'm expecting more along the lines of:
2014: 65-97
2015: 72-90
2016: 81-81
2017+: Playoffs/legit contender

Yours is a much more pessimistic view, I think.

It might come to pass that way and if so, I think a lot of people are going to be furious.

If the run differential hovers around where it is or even somehow improves I think the large win total jump that rarely happens year to year becomes a possibility for 2015. I don't ever want to place my hopes in the hands of luck but the idea is that in 2015 you have a team that can play .500 ball and if they just can even out in the luck dept. suddenly you're a wild card contender.

I don't understand the point of using run differential as a signal of future success when we're basically all agreed that most of these guys we're seeing aren't part of the long-term plans.  I get using it to gauge how they should be performing right now, but to use it to forecast a large win jump YOY for a team with likely a bunch of different guys?

[R-V]

.500 in 2015 and 90 wins in 2016 feel pretty unrealistic to me (though I hope I'm wrong.)

I'm expecting more along the lines of:
2014: 65-97
2015: 72-90
2016: 81-81
2017+: Playoffs/legit contender

Yours is a much more pessimistic view, I think.

It might come to pass that way and if so, I think a lot of people are going to be furious.

If the run differential hovers around where it is or even somehow improves I think the large win total jump that rarely happens year to year becomes a possibility for 2015. I don't ever want to place my hopes in the hands of luck but the idea is that in 2015 you have a team that can play .500 ball and if they just can even out in the luck dept. suddenly you're a wild card contender.

I don't understand the point of using run differential as a signal of future success when we're basically all agreed that most of these guys we're seeing aren't part of the long-term plans.  I get using it to gauge how they should be performing right now, but to use it to forecast a large win jump YOY for a team with likely a bunch of different guys?

This is a fair point on the pitching side. As a whole the Cubs pitching staff has 5.1 WAR, and Snork and Hammel, who could be gone soon, account for almost half of that total.

On the hitting side, Castro, Rizzo, Lake & Castillo account for 3.7 WAR. The Cubs AS A TEAM have 2.6 WAR. Which on the one hand tells you they've got some shitty, shitty players this year (their outfield is bad and full of negative WAR players), but on the other hand tells you that the guys who are actually making positive contributions to the run differential are going to be around for a while.

[Slaky]

.500 in 2015 and 90 wins in 2016 feel pretty unrealistic to me (though I hope I'm wrong.)

I'm expecting more along the lines of:
2014: 65-97
2015: 72-90
2016: 81-81
2017+: Playoffs/legit contender

Yours is a much more pessimistic view, I think.

It might come to pass that way and if so, I think a lot of people are going to be furious.

If the run differential hovers around where it is or even somehow improves I think the large win total jump that rarely happens year to year becomes a possibility for 2015. I don't ever want to place my hopes in the hands of luck but the idea is that in 2015 you have a team that can play .500 ball and if they just can even out in the luck dept. suddenly you're a wild card contender.

I don't understand the point of using run differential as a signal of future success when we're basically all agreed that most of these guys we're seeing aren't part of the long-term plans.  I get using it to gauge how they should be performing right now, but to use it to forecast a large win jump YOY for a team with likely a bunch of different guys?

This is a fair point on the pitching side. As a whole the Cubs pitching staff has 5.1 WAR, and Snork and Hammel, who could be gone soon, account for almost half of that total.

On the hitting side, Castro, Rizzo, Lake & Castillo account for 3.7 WAR. The Cubs AS A TEAM have 2.6 WAR. Which on the one hand tells you they've got some shitty, shitty players this year (their outfield is bad and full of negative WAR players), but on the other hand tells you that the guys who are actually making positive contributions to the run differential are going to be around for a while.

RV pretty much goes off what I'm thinking. The pitching obviously has to stabilize and I guess when you talk of trading two of your best that hurts. But the offensive players carrying the weight are long term guys who project to be part of a winning roster. Eventually the ones dragging it down would be replaced by much better players.

That's all I'm saying.