Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Who should be the #3 Prospect?

Poll ended at Mon Feb 22, 2016 3:15 pm

Albert Almora
21
40%
Jeimer Candelario
1
2%
Dylan Cease
3
6%
Oscar De La Cruz
0
No votes
Carl Edwards
1
2%
Ian Happ
21
40%
Eloy Jimenez
1
2%
Billy McKinney
3
6%
Eddy Julio Martinez
1
2%
Duane Underwood
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 52

User avatar
Tim
Hall of Fame
Posts: 44043
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2003 5:02 pm
Location: Naperville, IL
x 63
x 1777
Contact:

Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Postby Tim » Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:15 pm

Make your choice for the Cubs 2016 #3 prospect.

Cast votes for the players you think would be deserving at #3. You can vote for one player at this point, but you can change your vote up to the closing date.

If you want to have a player added to the list, please say so.

#1: Gleyber Torres
#2: Willson Contreras
0 x
Spoiler: show

Image

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 57365
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 1854
x 6127

Re: Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Postby jersey cubs fan » Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:21 pm

can we skip 3 and 4 and go straight to 5, because i don't see a top 3 prospect.
0 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
Tim
Hall of Fame
Posts: 44043
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2003 5:02 pm
Location: Naperville, IL
x 63
x 1777
Contact:

Re: Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Postby Tim » Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:27 pm

jersey cubs fan wrote:can we skip 3 and 4 and go straight to 5, because i don't see a top 3 prospect.

Yep, all these guys are flawed in some way. I'll be going with Happ-McKinney-Almora, but I can see those guys in any order. I can also see votes for Cease based on his upside, though I can't put him up there until we see some evidence of his being able to reach it.
0 x
Spoiler: show

Image

User avatar
Duke Silver
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 9956
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2014 6:45 am
x 10124
x 6806

Re: Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Postby Duke Silver » Wed Feb 17, 2016 4:52 pm

I'm going Almora, but certainly not emphatically. Good defense at a prime position, plus really good contact skills... that's enough for me to feel secure about this pick. I would love to see him continue to draw more walks and keep up his hot hitting from the end of last year. If he truly is laying off the junk and looking for pitches to drive and can show himself to be a guy that could reasonably be a >.700 OPS guy, then I think he is the best of what is left, given his proximity to the big leagues. I might be way off on Happ. But, I am just not comfortable with him K'ing like that in the lower levels. Given me the safer pick in Almora.
0 x

User avatar
Cubswin11
Superstar
Posts: 19271
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 8:17 pm
x 2992
x 2962

Re: Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Postby Cubswin11 » Wed Feb 17, 2016 4:54 pm

Happ, almost went with him at 2. I think he's a top 20ish prospect in MLB by this time next year.
0 x
Screw Pitchers

User avatar
Transmogrified Tiger
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 54989
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:23 pm
Location: Greater St. Louis
x 365
x 4958

Re: Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Postby Transmogrified Tiger » Wed Feb 17, 2016 5:15 pm

I can see arguments for Cease, EJM, or even Edwards, but I went with Almora. There's some logical reasons to believe in his second half at AA, which if it's remotely real put him in a very good spot to be a solid MLB contributor while others are a lot more speculative.

I don't understand the Happ love this early. I'm hoping to be proven wrong that he was just out of gas or something, but a .241/.315/.448 line in South Bend w/ a near 25% K rate from a college draftee that doesn't provide much defensive value does not scream like a player that should be getting top of the list consideration.
1 x

User avatar
Cubswin11
Superstar
Posts: 19271
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 8:17 pm
x 2992
x 2962

Re: Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Postby Cubswin11 » Wed Feb 17, 2016 5:29 pm

Transmogrified Tiger wrote:I don't understand the Happ love this early. I'm hoping to be proven wrong that he was just out of gas or something, but a .241/.315/.448 line in South Bend w/ a near 25% K rate from a college draftee that doesn't provide much defensive value does not scream like a player that should be getting top of the list consideration.

I certainly get that but I am giving the FO the benefit of doing really well on 1st round college bats recently along with the scouting reports that Happ was one of the best college bats in the draft last year.
0 x
Screw Pitchers

User avatar
Duke Silver
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 9956
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2014 6:45 am
x 10124
x 6806

Re: Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Postby Duke Silver » Wed Feb 17, 2016 5:32 pm

Transmogrified Tiger wrote:I can see arguments for Cease, EJM, or even Edwards, but I went with Almora. There's some logical reasons to believe in his second half at AA, which if it's remotely real put him in a very good spot to be a solid MLB contributor while others are a lot more speculative.

I don't understand the Happ love this early. I'm hoping to be proven wrong that he was just out of gas or something, but a .241/.315/.448 line in South Bend w/ a near 25% K rate from a college draftee that doesn't provide much defensive value does not scream like a player that should be getting top of the list consideration.


Yeah, his numbers in South Bend scare me a lot. Looking at his Eugene stats: 17.7% BB%, 21.5% K%. OK, I can deal with a >20% K-rate if you are walking that damn much. You could even attribute the K-rate to him just being uber-patient at the plate. Looking at the South Bend stats, though: 10.3% BB% and 23.6% K%. Well, you moved up to full-season ball. The K's are about the same, a little up. To be expected. The walks are down quite a bit, though. Still a fine walk rate, but it isn't exceptional. It's certainly not enough to make up for an astronomical strikeout rate from a college bat in A-ball. Granted, these are both incredibly small sample sizes, so it doesn't mean much -- especially when comparing them against each other. But, one thing is for certain: from his time in both places, it is pretty obvious that he is going to strikeout a fair amount.

If he walks like he did in Eugene, I'm all in, K's be damned (unless it gets up near 30%). But, if that gulf between K% and BB% remains about where it was at South Bend -- or, gasp, even widens -- then I'm out on him. He just doesn't have enough other positives for me to be OK with him striking out like that, especially considering what level he is in.
0 x

User avatar
Transmogrified Tiger
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 54989
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:23 pm
Location: Greater St. Louis
x 365
x 4958

Re: Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Postby Transmogrified Tiger » Wed Feb 17, 2016 5:37 pm

Duke Silver wrote:
Transmogrified Tiger wrote:I can see arguments for Cease, EJM, or even Edwards, but I went with Almora. There's some logical reasons to believe in his second half at AA, which if it's remotely real put him in a very good spot to be a solid MLB contributor while others are a lot more speculative.

I don't understand the Happ love this early. I'm hoping to be proven wrong that he was just out of gas or something, but a .241/.315/.448 line in South Bend w/ a near 25% K rate from a college draftee that doesn't provide much defensive value does not scream like a player that should be getting top of the list consideration.


Yeah, his numbers in South Bend scare me a lot. Looking at his Eugene stats: 17.7% BB%, 21.5% K%. OK, I can deal with a >20% K-rate if you are walking that damn much. You could even attribute the K-rate to him just being uber-patient at the plate. Looking at the South Bend stats, though: 10.3% BB% and 23.6% K%. Well, you moved up to full-season ball. The K's are about the same, a little up. To be expected. The walks are down quite a bit, though. Still a fine walk rate, but it isn't exceptional. It's certainly not enough to make up for an astronomical strikeout rate from a college bat in A-ball. Granted, these are both incredibly small sample sizes, so it doesn't mean much -- especially when comparing them against each other. But, one thing is for certain: from his time in both places, it is pretty obvious that he is going to strikeout a fair amount.

If he walks like he did in Eugene, I'm all in, K's be damned (unless it gets up near 30%). But, if that gulf between K% and BB% remains about where it was at South Bend -- or, gasp, even widens -- then I'm out on him. He just doesn't have enough other positives for me to be OK with him striking out like that, especially considering what level he is in.



I could even be talked into the K rate given the IsoP, I can be a K rate apologist so 10% BB rate and .200 Iso are pretty good cover for a K rate in progress. It's the lack of average on top of that that's the killer. It's only 165 PA so I don't want to overreact too much, but hitting .241 as a college draftee at that level doesn't portend that well. Plenty of time to make me look stupid, but he's not coming close to cracking my Top 3 in a system that has a lot of players who can make a claim at that level.
2 x

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 57365
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 1854
x 6127

Re: Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Postby jersey cubs fan » Wed Feb 17, 2016 5:38 pm

I shall use the two sweetest words in the English language to describe my pick of Albert Almora:
de
fault
Image
1 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

toonsterwu
All-Star
Posts: 4330
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:10 am
x 31

Re: Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Postby toonsterwu » Thu Feb 18, 2016 4:16 am

I have a tough time going with McKinney or Zagunis here, as there's enough upside to look around at to go with two high floor guys, solid, but not superb, ceilings. Still, to each their own, and I do think both McKinney/Zagunis will see the bigs in their careers. Underwood's a tough call. On the one hand, love his potential. On the other hand, performance. I buy that he was working on his changeup, but still, in A+, with his raw stuff, he really should be able to show better than he did. Too high for EJM for me. With some mixed reports, just feel like we gotta know more to go this high. I've long been against ranking relievers too high unless they are just surefire lockdown late inning arms. Love CJ Edwards, not sure I'm going that far to call him surefire. High standard? Yes. A bit unfair? Perhaps the standard's a bit high, but that's the way I go with it. Love de la Cruz, but really ... I can't make the case that he's definitely a notch or two above Underwood, so no on him this high.

Going through the names, I'm left thinking the superb upside of two far away guys (Eloy and Dylan Cease), Ian Happ, and two upper level guys in Candelario and Almora. Jimenez is exciting, but swing wise, looks like he has some more work to do. A part of me wonders how Candelario would be viewed if he hadn't struggled in his first go-around at High A. I'm not sure if the way he flipped the switch on his discipline in AA is maintainable at that level, but I think he's a good hitter who should stick at 3rd, is young, and is in AA. I think he'll hit for a solid average with his bat speed, and I think he'll develop a tick above average power. That's a very talented guy. But is that guy better than Almora right now, value wise? I'm not sure Almora's red hot August is exactly a true representation, but I do buy that he's improved, and I do buy that his defense is still going to be good to great through his cost-controlled years and perhaps to his prime. Will he hit enough? Probably. Will he hit enough and with some pop? A bit more debatable.

I keep thinking that there's shades of Brett Jackson's flaws with Ian Happ, namely the swings and misses (although by most accounts, it's not the exactly same issue, as IIRC, Jackson had trouble getting too some pitches). Add in uncertainty on his defensive position, and there's enough things to poke holes at. Still ... while he might not have a plus hit tool, he makes good contact, has power. If you squint hard, you can see some glimmers of a poor man's George Springer here. Cease seems to have improved his mechanics, still has two potential plus pitches, and has time. Yeah, I get the concerns about long range health, but we're really thinking his cost-controlled years, at best, into his prime years. Is there a chance he gets Edwards push to the pen? Perhaps, but you sort of bet against that as of now.

I've gone back and forth on this on my own list for awhile, and I'm apt to change my mind again. I've sort of talked myself into Candelario in the last few weeks, and I'm sticking with that for this vote, fully expecting him to not be voted on. No, he doesn't have the power ceiling of Ian Happ, but he's a bit more polished, has shown that he's got a good approach at the plate, has improved defensively, and the bat speed is there. Now, I know there's been some mixed reports on the bat speed, but there's been enough positive reports. He's improved enough at 3rd to think that, unless a team has a better option, a team could probably live with him there through his cost-controlled years and maybe into his prime, although one would suspect that they would be looking for a better option. He's still so awfully young, and still tapping into his offensive potential.

I swore I wouldn't talk myself into Candelario all winter, but I kept asking myself ... what's the extreme negative to not push him up here? He's had one offensive hiccup year that seemed to get him "lost" in the system, but really, he's a good offensive talent coming into his own and he's developed defensively. I keep thinking that holds for Almora as well, and much as I tried to talk myself out of it, Almora worked his way up for me as well. I'm just a bit more comfortable with Candelario's offensive profile right now ... but I get an Almora pick. I really wanted to go with Cease - big time stuff, improved mechanics, but really gotta seem him do more to really go on that train.
0 x

craig
All-Star
Posts: 4101
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:52 pm
x 38

Re: Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Postby craig » Thu Feb 18, 2016 5:26 am

Almora. I had him #3 when I made my lists at the end of September, and no reason to change it now. (Well, maybe Heyward is a reason.....)

No sure things here. Almora's defense really opens doors for him, and the offensive bar isn't that high for a high-end defensive center fielder. Combine his defense with a .730-OPS and you'd have a very valuable major leaguer. For him to be a .700+ guy in the majors, granted that's very iffy. But with his low-K profile, it's not unrealistic either.
0 x

Bilbo161
Role Player
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 7:32 pm
Location: Palatine, IL

Re: Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Postby Bilbo161 » Mon Feb 22, 2016 12:32 am

Almora for me. Happ was considered but like a few others he seems more of a question mark for me. I'd like to see him at a bit higher level before I put him ahead of Albert.
0 x

jacey
Role Player
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 2:03 am
Location: Popcorn Sutton, TN

Re: Cubs 2016 #3 Prospect

Postby jacey » Mon Feb 22, 2016 2:08 am

ALMORA....Happ is not that high of prospect to me just yet. I think he is a bit overrated by some at this point but we will see
0 x


Return to “Minor Leagues”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest