Author Topic: On The Farm  (Read 324152 times)

Playtwo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8787
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1125 on: February 14, 2016, 05:09:58 pm »
Not sure.  If I did, I was wrong.

chgojhawk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 998
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1126 on: February 14, 2016, 05:13:45 pm »
"Willson Contreras stepping forward and having the year that he had last year. He’ll start the season in Triple-A and hopefully we’ll see him at some point during the 2016 season. Now it’s time for the other guys, an opportunity for them to step up.”

Love it.

I still think that if Contreras starts strong, we will see him in Chicago well before September in order to allow the Cubs to see if they can move Montero near the trade deadline for a nice return.

If Montero is going to bring a good return there is no shot the Cubs will move him UNLESS our season is a total disaster.

We are going for it this year. If Montero is playing well enough to bring a nice return, a competing Cubs team isn't trading their #1 catcher.  A Cubs team that underperforms and is out of contention would trade him.

If he isn't the #1 catcher, he isn't going to bring a nice return.

I am hoping that the Cubs don't trade Montero for a nice return.

Jes Beard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1127 on: February 14, 2016, 05:32:44 pm »
If Montero is going to bring a good return there is no shot the Cubs will move him UNLESS our season is a total disaster.

We are going for it this year. If Montero is playing well enough to bring a nice return, a competing Cubs team isn't trading their #1 catcher.  A Cubs team that underperforms and is out of contention would trade him.

If he isn't the #1 catcher, he isn't going to bring a nice return.

I am hoping that the Cubs don't trade Montero for a nice return.

If Montero is hitting at league average for his position, and is performing behind the plate as he has been, and a contending team which is over-performing in 2016 needs a catcher, whether he is "the #1 catcher" at that time, or whether Maddon intends on keeping him as the #1 catcher, will not be factors in determining his return, and if there are no other better catchers available, the Cubs could likely extract a very favorable return.  If that is combined with Contreras having had a good start and a good performance at bat and behind the plate, Montero becomes not only expendable, but presents the opportunity for a good return in trade.

Is that combination of factors likely?

No, just as it was not likely in 2015 that the Cubs got the kind of production they say from Schwarber, Bryant and Russell all at one time.

Things do happen, and if the combination of factors I mentioned happen in 2016, all of them being possible, it would not be at all surprising to see the Cubs move Montero for prospects.  I would actually be surprised if they failed to do so.  If the factors I set out are combined with Scharber doing well behind the plate in 2016, it would become even more likely.

davep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15849
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1128 on: February 14, 2016, 08:29:21 pm »
If Montero is going to bring a good return there is no shot the Cubs will move him UNLESS our season is a total disaster.

We are going for it this year. If Montero is playing well enough to bring a nice return, a competing Cubs team isn't trading their #1 catcher.  A Cubs team that underperforms and is out of contention would trade him.

If he isn't the #1 catcher, he isn't going to bring a nice return.

I am hoping that the Cubs don't trade Montero for a nice return.

I doubt that Montero will be traded, but trading him does not necessarily hurt the team's chances this year.  Suppose that Heyward is injured, out for the season.  If the Cubs feel that Contreras is capable of being the full time catcher, they might trade Montero for a center fielder and improve the team's chances to succeed.

He does not necessarily have to be traded for prospects.

chgojhawk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 998
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1129 on: February 14, 2016, 09:22:14 pm »
I doubt that Montero will be traded, but trading him does not necessarily hurt the team's chances this year.  Suppose that Heyward is injured, out for the season.  If the Cubs feel that Contreras is capable of being the full time catcher, they might trade Montero for a center fielder and improve the team's chances to succeed.

He does not necessarily have to be traded for prospects.

Respectfully, I will disagree.  I know that there have been playoff teams that have gone with a rookie catcher, but those occurrences are rare.  I don't recall a single playoff team trading a veteran catcher who is respected as a decent receiver (not fair to say pitch framer as that hasn't been tracked very long) to allow for a rookie to handle the staff.

If Montero is injured I believe that the Cubs would go with Contreras over Ross, but then Contreras wouldn't bring value in a trade.

If Heyward is injured I believe that the Cubs would look for an Austin Jackson type to handle the job rather than moving Montero for a CF.  Austin Jackson types are always available late in the season.

I stand by my previous comment that the only way Montero is traded for value is if the Cubs lay an egg this season.  Even then I question how much he will bring in a trade.  32 year old catcher who doesn't hit a ton, has an above average OBP, is considered average (at best) defensively and is signed for another season at $14 mil.  I'm thinking a B level prospect.

Best case scenario, IMHO, is that Contreras and Montero share the catching duties this season.  Hopefully Contreras does well and plays more often than Miggy.  I simply don't see the Cubs trading Montero (or getting value if we do trade him) unless we are junk this year.

brjones

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25868
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1130 on: February 15, 2016, 09:41:13 am »
Another top 100 prospect list...this one is from ZiPS projections.  There is no subjective input from scouts, just statistical projections.  So take it with a grain of salt.  That said, the Cubs still look pretty good on this list.

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/14780758/steven-matz-aj-reed-rank-highly-zips-top-100-prospects-list-mlb

26. Albert Almora
42. Willson Contreras
45. Gleyber Torres
56. Billy McKinney
62. Ian Happ

jacey1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1005
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1131 on: February 15, 2016, 12:27:08 pm »
They aren't trading Montero in season unless they are out of the chase

Jes Beard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1132 on: February 15, 2016, 02:06:23 pm »
They aren't trading Montero in season unless they are out of the chase

In 1964 some team in the middle of a pennant race traded a 27-year-old starting pitcher who just the year before had been their top starter, and got in return an entirely unproven no-power corner OFer who after two and a half seasons in the majors as a starter had an OPS+ below 90.... and yet somehow the trade worked out okay for the Cardinals, despite the replacement starter they had for Ernie Broglio being a 34-year-old pitcher who had lost more than 20 games for each of the prior two seasons.

The point is that it makes little sense to set down bright line rules for what teams can or can't, will or won't do in a pennant race regardless the circumstances.

In 1964 the Cardinals proved themselves quite wise in trading Broglio for Brock.  And, under the kind of circumstances I have suggested, it is entirely possible the Cubs might do what is not normal for a team in a pennant race.  (I have not even addressed the very reasonable possibility that Montero in 2016 is hitting more like he did in 2013 [83 OPS+] or 2014 [95 OPS+] instead of as he did in 2015 [106 OPS+, two points above his career average], in which case Maddon might be eager to have a younger, better hitting, catcher, particularly if Ross remains healthy and is able to provide needed defensive experience, factors which could still leave a catching hungry contending team willing to overpay for Montero.)

I am not saying Montero WILL be traded.  I am simply pointing out that the absolutist insistence that such a trade simply would not happen unless the Cubs have tanked or Montero is under-performing so badly that he would no longer really be a viable starting catcher anyway is a foolish position.

craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13097
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1133 on: February 15, 2016, 02:37:16 pm »
Another top 100 prospect list...this one is from ZiPS projections.  There is no subjective input from scouts, just statistical projections.  So take it with a grain of salt.  That said, the Cubs still look pretty good on this list.

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/14780758/steven-matz-aj-reed-rank-highly-zips-top-100-prospects-list-mlb

26. Albert Almora
42. Willson Contreras
45. Gleyber Torres
56. Billy McKinney
62. Ian Happ

Surprising that Almora scores so high in the statistical ranking, as he did to varying degree in another one.  (Katoh?)  In his case it would seem that his CF defense would make his actual rating stronger than a stats-based one, since I wouldn't think a stats-based eval could do full justice to defense.  Perhaps speaks to how sensitive the stats-based rankings are to K-rates, and age-per-level. 

If I'm assuming that computer-formula evals might struggle with defensive valuation, I wonder if they also perhaps struggle with power.  Maybe real scouts look at Almora and conclude "will never have power"; but perhaps computer-formula doesn't count power against him as badly, and doesn't realize that his actual swing doesn't have the future-power projection that other kids his age with comparably modest power-stats do have? 

Jes Beard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17183
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1134 on: February 15, 2016, 03:12:21 pm »
Surprising that Almora scores so high in the statistical ranking, as he did to varying degree in another one.  (Katoh?)  In his case it would seem that his CF defense would make his actual rating stronger than a stats-based one, since I wouldn't think a stats-based eval could do full justice to defense.  Perhaps speaks to how sensitive the stats-based rankings are to K-rates, and age-per-level. 

If I'm assuming that computer-formula evals might struggle with defensive valuation, I wonder if they also perhaps struggle with power.  Maybe real scouts look at Almora and conclude "will never have power"; but perhaps computer-formula doesn't count power against him as badly, and doesn't realize that his actual swing doesn't have the future-power projection that other kids his age with comparably modest power-stats do have? 

Or perhaps the ZIPS projections are an illustration of the GIGO principle.

Merely because someone comes up with a "stats-based" formula and spits out a bunch of projections doesn't mean they have any value.

Reb

  • Guest
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1135 on: February 15, 2016, 05:00:52 pm »
Another team prospects ratings, this one from Fangraphs. Cubs at #17.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/katohs-farm-system-rankings/

CUBluejays

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17344
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1136 on: February 16, 2016, 12:57:57 pm »
http://media.baseballamerica.com/mp3/free/160215.mp3

BA Podcast talking about how they come up with their rankings and evals of players.

craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13097
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1137 on: February 18, 2016, 10:42:30 pm »
http://chicagocubsonline.com/archives/2016/02/theo-epstein-talks-cubs-and-rotisserie-baseball-on-siriusxm-fantasy-baseball.php

Theo, on Contreras and Almora:
"...Great blocker, really strong throwing arm, has a chance to be a force defensively. ....is going to be, I think, a really productive offensive catcher to go along with his throwing arm. Obviously catching development takes time and you need your opportunity. .... "

"Albert Almora...’s just starting to figure out his approach. Added a lot, the right kind of muscle this winter. I just saw him taking BP yesterday and was mishitting balls out of the ballpark and smoking balls all over the field. The ball is coming off his bat a little bit differently than it has in previous years. ....”

Chris27

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18092
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1138 on: February 19, 2016, 01:27:01 am »
Sounds like the 'everything's golden in spring training' virus has afflicted Theo.

Deeg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16920
Re: On The Farm
« Reply #1139 on: February 19, 2016, 01:27:07 am »
Everyone's a blue-chipper in February...