Bleacher Bums Forum

Ballesteros is for sure a hinge prospect. 
1.  Gomes will be 36. 
2.  Amaya is a nice kid, and after having missed most of the previous 3 seasons his readiness was a fun surprise.  But assuming Amaya as a primary catcher down the road is a possible hope, but no certainty.  His soft qualities are good, but hitting and throwing are part of baseball too.  Young players can get better, so who knows.  But it's possible that he'll be pretty bad offensively, and will be even worse in managing the stolen-base game.  I hope he grows into it, but assuming Amaya as the primary catcher for a string of contending seasons is shaky. 

Ballesteros, who knows.  Haven't gotten any great defensive reports on him.  And it's not like he was a big power guy this year.  2/3 of his hits were singles.  (120 hits, 79 singles, 14 HR, 27 doubles).  Hard to know how he projects. 
1.  Power, for example, a lot of teenagers mature physically and grow into more power.  A lot of heavy teenage athletes go to college football, and get way more sculpted by age 21 or 22.  Maybe Ballesteros at 22 will be a physical specimen, and he'll hit with more XBH/HR power down the road?  Or maybe not, maybe he's already full-grown and 14-HR is kinda the HR-level that we should project?  Who knows?
2.  Catching:  A lot of big-league catchers weren't big-league ready as teenagers.  Maybe his receiving and throwing will be just fine with work, in terms of the physical stuff? 
3.  Soft stuff:  Who knows, maybe he's the smartest student of the game, and will be a good pitcher-whisperer, and he'll have all the soft-stuff that Gomes has?  Who knows? 

But yeah, *IF* between Amaya and Ballasteros the Cubs had two good home-grown catchers for years, and *if* Ballesteros could hypothetically become a solid defensive guy and a good offensive guy, that can change the trajectory of a franchise.

PCA named Minor League Defensive Player of the Year (including ALL positions)!

craig - I think you are over over-thinking Hoyer's comments and trying too hard to imagine exactly what he meant. Hoyer did not say that PCA would have to "change his swing." Instead, Hoyer said PCA "has to make certain changes offensively" to adjust to major league pitchers (that may or may not mean "changing his swing" even though Hoyer did say that was what Rizzo did). Nor did he say PCA would have to "learn "how to steal bases." Rather he said "as he refines his baserunning and stolen bases, he's going to have such an impact on the bases." Maybe it's best not to try to read too much into these sort of comments?

craig - I think you are over over-thinking Hoyer's comments and trying too hard to imagine exactly what he meant. Hoyer did not say that PCA would have to "change his swing." Instead, Hoyer said PCA "has to make certain changes offensively" to adjust to major league pitchers (that may or may not mean "changing his swing" even though Hoyer did say that was what Rizzo did). Nor did he say PCA would have to "learn "how to steal bases." Rather he said "as he refines his baserunning and stolen bases, he's going to have such an impact on the bases." Maybe it's best not to try to read too much into these sort of comments?

I'm with Craig's interpretation of Hoyer's remarks.

One has to grasp the way that Hoyer talks.  When talking about personnel, he NEVER says exactly what he's really talking about.  Hoyer talks in a kind of code, a code that Craig has accurately deciphered.  Hoyer has been here long enough that it's not that hard to decipher in many instances.

"Has to make certain changes" is classic Hoyer code.  He has to acknowledge PCA struggled, obviously, and saying that he has to change his swing to deal with holes in his swing is too severe for the way that Hoyer talks.  So, it's "has to make certain changes."  Classic.  Craig is spot on.  Ditto for "refines" his baserunning.  Classic.

Reb - I admire your ability to decipher Hoyer's general statements with such specificity and clarity.  I admit to being unable to do that.

I would have thought PCA already knows "how to steal bases" (since he did steal 46 in the minor leagues this season, while admittedly getting caught 10 times, an 82% success rate). Might Hoyer mean instead that he needs to make better choices or something like that?

And "change his swing" suggests to me a fundamental change in his swing overall (not just in certain circumstances), which may indeed, be what Hoyer has in mind. But could he possibly mean adjusting his swing in different situations (maybe in different counts or with different types of pitchers or whatever) or some other "adjustments?" 

Ron-I just don’t take Hoyer at face value on certain things. That’s part of his job——messaging to the media and fans—on his terms. Jed has been here 12 years now and think most fans and media get it that he speaks in a kind of code at times. After all these years of listening to Hoyer, think that Craig did a good job of deciphering. Maybe you need another year or two to get there.

The big leagues are different than the minors. PCA baserunning wasn’t great in majors (2 CS and at least one blunder) and neither was his swing. “Swing” includes his stride, balance, hands——and not just path to the ball. Again, think Craig was spot on in referring to “swing” from Hoyer’s remarks even if Hoyer didn’t utter the “swing” word. 

Generally, I wouldn’t reach too much of a conclusion in as few PAs as PCA got. But, he was so obviously overmatched. Unlike Deeg, I was not prepared for how dramatically PCA was overmatched by high heat. Like some others here, I saw every one of those PAs. This was not a matter of adjusting “to different situations” “different counts” or “different pitchers.”  He was dominated, period. Yeah, he needs to do stuff with his swing. Not precluding other stuff too, but starts with the basic. Think likely he’ll be able to do what’s necessary but will take some time.

Evan Carter of Rangers is five months younger than PCA and has hit since he got to majors late this season and is rocking in post-season. So, it’s not just PCA’s age. He has a swing issue and things to learn about stealing bases.

Point taken, Ron.  You're right, I don't know what Hoyer really wants him to change, or what changes he can or will make.  And maybe it won't involve his swing.  And sure, I may be overthinking it. 

You are also right, Hoyer didn't literally say PCA would change his swing.  Just that "he has to make certain changes", "there are adjustments that [he] needs to make", that he needs to take it to heart and "go make those changes".  He wrapped that around his analogy to Rizzo, who realized "you have to make real changes", and who "completely altered his swing", and who "realized there were pitches that he couldn't get to and he needed to make adjustments, needed to make those changes..." 

My hypothesis is that the Cubs analogously saw that there were pitches that PCA couldn't get to; that there are some [swing] changes that will need to be made to get to those. 

Hoyer said the struggle could be "the single best thing that could have happened" for PCA (said that twice.).  Change that will be the "single best thing" for PCA's career sounds more than trivial.

Overthinking, perhaps... But my hypothesis is that the Cubs will *not* assume PCA as the April center fielder, as they go through winter planning.  They'll want to prepare for an April where he'll start at Iowa, to work on those changes (and refine his baserunning.) 

craig - I completely agree, I'd be shocked if the Cubs have plans for PCA to start the season anywhere but Iowa. It got the impression he was brought up at the end of the season only because his speed and defense were assets that could be utilized on a selective basis while they were fighting to get into the playoffs. I expect they'll be cautious about bringing him up in 2024 unless and until they think he has very good chance of sticking.

Actually I agree.  That's why I was dumbfounded why he was constantly put into the game in pressure situations for proven players.  The one time he pinch hit for Tauchman vs. a lefty was a real head-scratcher.