John Sickels On Brett Jackson
From Minor League Ball.
10 months ago
Al Yellon
166 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Hmmm...
…… doesn’t sound like the next HOF to me. What I got out of that was a guy whose ceiling is “above average” who strikes out a lot. Maybe the Arizona Fall League is a better spot for him than sitting in September. I would also think, just from this, unless he simply rips through Spring Training and cuts down on his strike outs, that he starts 2012 in Iowa.
Help bring Boys of Spring The Movie to life!
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1742828131/boys-of-spring-the-movie
He could do both.
Come to the major leagues in Sept., get a taste, then play the AZ Fall League also.
Speaking of which, it should be getting very close to the time when we find out which Cubs prospects are going to the AZFL.
Join us for complete MLB coverage at SB Nation's Baseball Nation
Just based on this though......
…. I don’t see him as the “be all end all” some seem to around here.
Help bring Boys of Spring The Movie to life!
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1742828131/boys-of-spring-the-movie
I don't think he is, either.
But he is a guy who could be a solid regular player for a long time, maybe make a couple of All-Star teams. We haven’t even had that in recent years.
Join us for complete MLB coverage at SB Nation's Baseball Nation
If that's what you get out of the conversations here, you're not reading it correctly.
He’s got the ceiling of a very very good regular player, possible semi-regular all star. No one is crowning him the best thing since sliced bread, but when you get a player like this to come through and be under team control for 6 years, that’s still exciting.
Someone on that link used a Lankford comp, which I think is perfect for Jackson. If we can get a CFer who will put up a career line of .272/.364/.477/.841 with around 250 HRs and 250 SB who puts up seasons of 5.5-6.5 WAR in their prime, that’s pretty impressive.
Right...
I’ve made the Edmonds comp as his top-end, but I think most agree he’s more likely a 15-20 HR, 15-20 SB type of guy who doesn’t hit for a ton of average but walks a lot. I think Sickels’ projection is very similar to what almost everyone has been suggesting here.
I’m not sure where you got the impression that he’s the “be all end all” prospect. He’s a really good prospect that project to be a superstar, but could develop into a star if everything went right.
Well sad bdlugz
I think Jackson could also sniff an all-star game or two. He’s should be a very good player. Ks will probably limit upside but he makes up for that with a great eye that should allow his OBP to be +.100 over his BA.
He likely isn’t going to be Matt Kemp in his prime but he is going to be an asset at the top of the order for us and he projects to be strong defensively as well.
sounds like you are the one projecting here
I don’t recall anyone making the “be all and end all” claim you reference.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Aug 9, 2011 9:44 AM CDT up reply actions
Do you have a source you can cite as him being this "be all end all"?
Fire Jim Hendry. Injuries aren't the problem.
by Shanghai Badger on Aug 9, 2011 10:18 AM CDT up reply actions
Who thought he was HOF?
He has always projected as more of a .270-.280 hitter with a .370 OBP potential. 20ish HR’s and lots of strikeouts.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
Those numbers sound like a (slightly) lesser version of Grady Sizemore (pre-injuries)
I’m guessing no one would complain about that.
by Jody Jody Davis on Aug 9, 2011 10:37 AM CDT up reply actions
Nope, some good comps brought up are edmonds with less power/more speed, Granderson, and Lankford.
I’d love any of those guys to be my cost controlled CFer for the next 6+ years.
The key word here being "CF"
That kind of production out of CF would be enormous, especially in terms of WAR. Jackson’s a serious athlete, and while he does struggle a big with K’s, I actually think that is something he will improve on with proper ML coaching. A lot of his K’s stem from being so patient, so as he takes wing under Jaramillo, I think we will see more early count aggressiveness and less K’s. Now could this also effect his OBP? It very well could, it just depends how he adjusts. Either way, all signs point to him being a productive CF, and every team in the league needs one of those to win. Cubs fans should be excited.
I don't think the hitting coach will have an effect...
Jaramillo hasn’t hurt the walk rates of Fukudome, Pena, or Soto. I doubt he’d really make a difference on Jackson’s OBP either.
I don't count on it changing either
just throwing the possibility out there. If Rudy sees that Jackson is striking out a lot because he’s taking a lot of pitches, he may encourage him to swing earlier. In that case, average most likely goes up as well as the average dependent OBP. Or the average could go up and the OBP could drop. Like I said, it’s all how a player mentally and physically adjusts the the tenure of ML pitching. I think his approach right now is fine, and he’s only going to improve on that as he matures.
Agreed with this....
The couple of times I’ve seen Jackson I thought he showed a level swing that allowed for plate coverage. I think with a good hitting coach like Jaramillo we could see his BA go up during his big league career. He’s definitely a guy I think can put up a .300 season or two in the big leagues…That’s something we’ll most likely see blossom in the big leagues.
I'm almost 100% that he will be the Cubs Opening Day CF
unless he’s traded. I’d be absolutely shocked if he is in Iowa.
Wow, you'd think I personally insulted people here
If any of you have actually seen Jackson play over a period of time, I’ll defer to you. The rest that haven’t, well, we all have our opinions.
Help bring Boys of Spring The Movie to life!
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1742828131/boys-of-spring-the-movie
I don't think anyone was overly rude or attacking you for your comment, just correcting a misconception you stated I suppose.
Your concern with strike outs is legitimate, however his strikeouts tend to come from being overly patient, not from bad pitch recognition. That alone makes a big difference. It’s not like he’s whiffing on curve balls out of the zone or slow on fastballs. He catches a lot of boarder line pitches that go against him – if anything one would argue he’s trying to be TOO patient. Things like that can change with time, and if he turns out to be any of these comps, he might start getting some pitches that go his way instead of go for a strike.
At this point, he’s 23 and has nothing left to prove in Iowa. He’s shown he can hit for average, carry a good OBP, and have a very solid slugging and ISO at every level. There’s absolutely nothing stopping him from starting for the Cubs in 2012, so at this point you may as well stick him there and let him get his feet wet.
Nothing left to prove in Iowa?
Look, I hope he’s the next Cub HOFer and you seem to know more about his game than I do. But nothing left to prove after just 25 games??
I think this fanbase is so desperate for a home grown stud that we rush to anoint the first guy that shows potential. Jackson isn’t even on the 40 man. Let’s slow down just a bit. Nothing says he’s coming up in September just yet. If he tears it up in Spring fine, otherwise he’s Pie and Colvin and Lord knows who else all over again.
Help bring Boys of Spring The Movie to life!
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1742828131/boys-of-spring-the-movie
It should be noted I don't put much stock into PCL batting lines
So I would’ve been fine if he went right from AA to the majors.
If we had anyone blocking him, I’d be fine with him getting more seasoned, but he can come up right now and play every day. I’d rather he get his feet wet in the majors this September so we know what we’ve got going on for next year.
Top prospects don't spend much time in AAA these days.
AA is the big test. Just because we’ve had failed outfield prospects before doesn’t mean you should compare Jackson to them. In fact, the two guys you named struggled in large part to poor plate discipline. Jackson may K a good bit, but draws a ton of walks, unlike those too. Why wouldn’t people be excited about a top 50 prospect who’s tearing it up and appears ready for a call up? We don’t have anything to look forward to at the big league level this year excepting watching Castro, so of course people are going to be excited to see a guy who has a very good chance to be a good player for years to come. Nobody has talked about him as a hall of famer or the end all be all, but he’s one of our best pieces to build around for the future. And unless he’s traded, he should be our opening day CF. He has a very good chance to be our best OF next year unless we make a huge OF addition in the offseason.
I've seen him play at both Iowa and Tennessee this year
4 games, I believe. And everytime he looked good. He’s more than just a guy who’s going to hit..he’s going to provide spark and swag. He cares, and it’s alot deeper than just stats with him.
Sound like he has the potential
of maybe a Jim Edmonds at the high end.
Not much we haven't already heard/talked about here.
Jackson’s broad base of skills makes him a better bet than most to be a successful MLB player. I feel like he goes underrated in prospect land because the skillset is so broad that it overrides nowadays that he was drafted as an upside/tools player (which Sickels mentions).
I have to say, I like this Granderson comp I made yesterday. It’s not perfect, because player comparisons never are, but they share a ton of qualities that add up to a good (albeit Jackson is just a potentially good) CF. First off, they’re both built like brickhouses with thick upper bodies. Then it’s the above average speed, the line drive stroke (Granderson rebuilt his swing with the Yankees and stays more on the same plane now observationally), the solid D, the underrated gap and HR power, solid patience, lots of K’s, great makeups…That sounds like alot of good players actually. Anyway, I even expect that like Granderson he can sneak a .300 AVG season into his career, but mostly he’ll settle into being a ~.270-ish hitter batting average wise.
I like seeing a player who’s refined his tools enough that no one is talking making outlandish expectations based on “raw upside.” There’s a much clearer picture of what his skills are and what kind of player that might profile into.
I expect he’ll be piece #3 in the up the middle group. They’ve arguably got the three hardest to fill ones down if he turns out to be good. C, SS, and CF….now all they need is someone who can outhit Barney at 2B (cough*LeMahieu*cough).
actually I like the Langford comp
a very good player with a few AS years
Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."
BJ is precisely the kind of player the Cubs system should be producing more of.
Forget the sure-shot Hall of Famers who’ve come up and disappointed us because they weren’t messiahs. A good system produces good players in enough quantity to fill out a core of talent on the major league roster and, if the GM so decides, to trade away for other useful players. For too long we (and the Cubs’ brain trust) have sought magical answers to our 103-y-o problem. To win the World Series we must slowly amass guys who are good; we don’t need to go gaga over guys who are going to be “great.” Come on up, Brett Jackson, man centerfield capably for five or ten years. Now let’s find similar players at 1st, 2nd, 3rd, LF, RF, and C. Then we can spend some millions on those one or two guys we need to get us over the top.
We have to demand more!
by copingwiththecubs on Aug 9, 2011 9:19 AM CDT reply actions
Why do we need to SLOWLY amass guys who are good?
I’m thrilled that the Cubs have a CF in Iowa who looks about ready to contribute — even if he’s not going to be an All-Star/HOFer. But I’d feel a lot better if the Cubs had two or three more Brett Jacksons in the system.
The best part of the improved Cubs system is that the players it’s sending to the bigs play hard-to-fill positions. But it would be nice if we could occasionally produce a corner outfielder or infielder with real potential. Colvin’s the closest thing we’ve seen in a while, and, well, that’s disappointing.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Szczur may be the next Brett Jackson, and may be in AA/AAA by next year if he progresses well.
Also guys like Flaherty and Lamehieu, while nowhere near Jackson’s level are still high quality players who will contribute to the team for awhile. Even if it’s only in back up roles, those add up quickly. Instead of 3-4M for a DeRosa type, we get one for 400-600K for 3 years and still at a bargain following that for 3 more.
by bdlugz on Aug 9, 2011 9:38 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly...
and there’s even a chance that one of those guys mans 2B or 3B in the near future.
But why does it have to happen 'slowly'?
I agree with your thinking (I’ve made this point before). It’s why Colvin might be valuable even if he’s not that good. He’s not not that good at a $5 million price tag.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Hopefully it will speed up the next couple years with all the money we're spending on the draft.
But it can’t happen automatically, not many guys are drafted and immediately at AA/AAA.
I think he used slowly to make sure they develop correctly.
If you develop slow and correctly, in time there will be players churned out every year that may or may not stick. Slow and steady would be what I want to see done. Sure, one that can go through the system fast would be nice, but if it takes an extra year to refine your game, so be it.
OK -- that I can get behind.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Well, wait a second.
We’re on a blog. We post comments composed of words. I don’t think there’s any problem with me questioning the use of one.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Teams don’t become player development machines overnight. It’s not really feasible considering that there’s hardly anyone who spends less than a couple of years in the minors for any team.
'Overnight'?
Jim Hendry’s been GM since July 5, 2002, and ran the farm system before that. No one is asking him to create a player development machine overnight — or criticizing him for not doing so. But am I criticizing him for not developing a player development machine over the course of a decade? Hells to the freaking yeah.
When I read your posts on this topic, I wonder if you think that someone else was GM of this team prior to 2006-07. In nearly 10 seasons as GM, Hendry has developed all of two All-Star position players (Castro and Soto) and Soto wasn’t an All-Star until Hendry’s seventh season as GM.
Granted, he’s been better at developing pitchers. But please don’t equate annoyance toward a GM for developing two position-player All-Stars in a decade (and not until six years in) with wanting a “player development machine overnight.”
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
by elgato on Aug 9, 2011 10:16 AM CDT up reply actions 5 recs
To be fair to Hendry, it's pretty obvious the goal of the Trib was not to have a good farm team...
This has really only changed with the most recent draft for Wilken/Hendry, and they’re blowing it out of the water with their signings. If they sign all of the players that are rumored at this point, it will be a top 5 draft with a lot fewer picks than the teams ranked better than us.
I'm sorry, but that doesn't cut it as far as excuses go.
For the length of time Hendry has worked with the farm system — since the late 1990s — the position-player results are terrible REGARDLESS of the Tribune’s focus.
Someone (ahem) is going to jump in and say how the Cubs developed guys who were key in acquiring Aramis and Lee. And that certainly buoys Hendry’s horse-trader credentials. Someone (ahem) is going to jump in and mention Corey Patterson and Felix Pie — two guys who have seriously fallen flat on expectations.
But 15 years of work in a minor league system with two position player All-Stars (both in the past four years)? That’s simply not good enough.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
by elgato on Aug 9, 2011 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
Oh, believe me, I'm certainly not saying that makes it all okay...
I’m simply saying it’s hard to build an incredible farm when you can’t spend the money to get there.
That still doesn’t give him a free pass for some seriously terrible drafts.
I am on board Elgato
Hendry doesn’t get a pass here. 10 years whether the cash is there to spend on the farm or not, you should be able to come up with more than one All Star and a borderline All star in Soto as position players go. Hendrys work as a GM is a borderline C.
I really like Jackson. He appears to a player the Cubs could place in center for 10 years and not worrying about that position to fill.
How does that not cut it?
If the owner wants to pump money into the majors because the owner is on the way out and wants to up the price of the team, there’s nothing a GM or scouting director can do to change that.
Why would this someone (ahem) mention Felix f’n Pie? Seriously?
The Tribune wasn't on the way out in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 or (probably) 2006.
Again, you seem to think Jim Hendry’s tenure began sometime in 2006-07.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Yeah I'm pretty sure a business as big as the Trib....
in a sport as big as baseball would know it’s going to sell before they actively start selling. I’m sure the idea didn’t just pop into someone’s head in ‘06-’07 to sell the team and boom there we are.
Just like you were pretty sure ...
that the Cubs didn’t get any good offers for Marshall/Pena et. al? Facts not in evidence, SG.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Uuuuuuuuuuum...
What evidence have you presented otherwise? The great haul that the Pirates gave up for Derrek Lee? The two prospects you choose to give TOR upside (with multiple sources calling them more mid-back guys that I linked) the Padres got for Adams?
You mean things you linked from before they broke out this year?
We all know you hate everyone elses prospects and love all of ours, but that’s not how prospects work.
Those two are both going to be easily top 50 by the end of the year.
Erlin hasn't broken out this year dude.
Nor does a break out necessarily raise the ceiling of a player. Covering that up with a “Zomg you hate everyone’s prospects” probably would work here, but that also doesnt make it true.
Prospect having good season does not equal prospect has TOR upside. That’s not how prospects work. It equals prospect having
good season.
Also, the Sickels Midseason article I linked specifically said that Weiland had mid rotation upside. Midseason as in this season.
by SenorGato on Aug 11, 2011 12:36 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
It's pretty easy to make a case for this being wrong
Dennis Fitzsimons wasn’t looking to sell the team in 2006. Sam Zell took TribCo private and it was his decision to divest certain assets, including the Cubs.
Fire Jim Hendry. Injuries aren't the problem.
by Shanghai Badger on Aug 10, 2011 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Why let facts get in the way?
According to him, Cashman was key in the drafting/initial signing of Jeter/Posada/Rivera/Pettitte, even though he wasn’t even a full-time Yankee employee at that time.
Cashman has been with the Yankees since the 80's.
The guy became the youngest GM in the history of baseball 12 years into his employment with the Yankees. I think it’s safe to assume he found a way to get involved, somehow.
Shanghai, you can make a case for pretty much anything. In the end common sense dictates that a major business like the Trib Company isn’t going to sell a huge business like the Cubs on a whim. It’s not as if Zell’s decision to make the company private came overnight…How is that even believable considering how bureaucratic a people we are/
Sam Zell bought the Trib on April 2nd, 2007...
You claim common sense out of one side of your mouth and yet claim ridiculous things out of the other.
by bdlugz on Aug 10, 2011 8:20 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
I'm sure the Tribune Company factored in
the direction he wanted to take the company when he bought it. I even think a property like the Cubs would get some discussion time.
Notice that the FA splurge of ‘06-’07 occurred came before Zell officially claimed his purchase.
You should read more about Cashman's history
he didn’t graduate college until 1989. He didn’t have a full-time job with the Yankees until 1992 (after those guys were acquired). Prior to that, he interned with the Yankees (beginning in 1986). I’m quite confident in saying that an intern probably had little/nothing to do with the signings of those four players.
by SouthernCub on Aug 10, 2011 10:36 PM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
Actually:
1 – He went into the Yankee organization as an intern, but not just some mail room intern or anything. He entered in their…scouting and player development department.
2 – In that department he worked closely with Stick Michael, the GM and the man credited with assembling much of that talent. Michael and Bob Watson are often cited as Cashman’s mentors, and worked/works closely with Cashman.
3 – The Yankee FO at the time had to put up a fight to keep many of those guys. Bernie and Pettite were almost traded by Steinbrenner because he didn’t like them as much as his FO guys did. Cashman has been said to be involved.
4 – You don’t just become the GM of the Yankees AND the youngest GM in history with only 6 years of full time employment without doing something that caught eyes. I think it’s safe to assume that maybe this intern did something a little more than twiddle his thumbs.
I'm sure he did more than twittle thumbs...
I’m also sure he wasn’t prominently involved in acquiring those guys. An intern/part-time security guard isn’t just isn’t going to be heavily involved in those decisions.
Cashman’s rise was meteoric. But it started mainly after those guys were acquired.
Part time security guard?
Wth? Cashman’s rise was meteoric, and it took place during the time period all those guys joined the organization. He worked in their scouting and player development department. Put two and two together.
by SenorGato on Aug 11, 2011 12:39 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Yes, part-time security guard
It’s in the same sentence that you referenced about his role in scouting/player development.
Good lord you’re acting dense. HE WAS AN INTERN!!! He got his first full-time job with the Yankees in 1992 (after those guys were drafted). Do you honestly think a part-time intern (even one who would go on to become a GM 6-8 years later) Put two and two together and stop acting so dense.
You either have no clue or you just like to be argumentative even when you know you’re wrong. Either one is irriting. I’m done talking with you.
by SouthernCub on Aug 11, 2011 12:51 PM CDT up reply actions
WTF?
Now you’re literally just GUESSING about things, and calling people stupid who don’t agree with you?
Wow…just…wow. You’re actually getting worse.
Fire Jim Hendry. Injuries aren't the problem
by Nunyabidness on Aug 11, 2011 2:11 PM CDT up reply actions
Blocking
It’s the right thing to do!
Fire Jim Hendry. Injuries aren't the problem.
by Shanghai Badger on Aug 11, 2011 9:58 PM CDT up reply actions
Whatever, chief
There are a handful of people that disagree with you that still find some reason to defend you – but continue to go out of your way to piss them off.
After I read how you basically crapped all over the Brett Jackson thread, I think the best way to handle you is to follow Dan’s example.
The minute insight that you offer isn’t worth sifting through the garbage you spew.
Fire Jim Hendry. Injuries aren't the problem.
by Shanghai Badger on Aug 11, 2011 7:51 AM CDT up reply actions
Oh look another one of these posts.
Do me a favor and gfy. I’m happy you’re ignoring me. It’s not as if I’m missing out on sensible conversation, just whiiiiiiny drivel like this.
Sorry I ruined the daily QIAFI thread for you. I should keep in mind that the QIAFI movement is helping you guys through the season.
by SenorGato on Aug 11, 2011 12:43 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
You know, you are real close to being out of here.
You think using an acronym (gfy) is OK here?
It’s not. One more transgression, you’re done.
Join us for complete MLB coverage at SB Nation's Baseball Nation
by Al Yellon on Aug 11, 2011 5:55 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Begs the question: what more does one have to do?
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Aug 12, 2011 8:24 AM CDT up reply actions
And the debt Sam piled on the company may have had juuuust a little to do with that......
Put a real impetus into the idea to sell whatever someone would buy – and no one was buying newspapers, even then.
OTOH someone (ahem)
will point to the success of Castro and Soto, a SS and a C, as a sign that maybe….juuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuust maybe because I know Hendry is a destroyer so it’s probably the whole blind squirrel thing at work…..the farm system is going to produce some position talent.
I know I should focus on the past because the past is somehow more more meaningful than what’s going on right now. I know that certain other teams (ahem?) have done it (with more money, better ownership, a FO with many more years together), and therefore the Cubs should have been doing it too. I even get that since they didn’t accomplish what arbitrary goals of the fans when it comes to a farm system we should retroactively punish them for it. I know I should be focusing on the flaws of the Cubs farm system rather than what they’ve produced, because the Cubs haven’t won a WS with that farm system and therefore failed. I get that logic. I get it and I will always completely disagree with it. I don’t think that’s how a major league farm system works, at all, to say the least. I do not think that just because the Cubs had to trade prospects to land cornerstone players (like the ahem other franchise would do and has done, hi Austin Jackson) because other teams have to LIKE THE PROSPECTS for that to happen.
Phil Hughes is the first Yankee SP prospect who might be a long term TOR SP option for the Yankees since Pettite (unless you’re a Ramiro Mendoza fan). Is that an indictment on their ability to scout, sign, keep, and develop SP talent, or is it a “who gives a damn” situation? The Yankees certainly don’t care…and I can garauntee their fans don’t…their farm system helped field position players and the Yankees used their resources to acquire pitching from other teams….It’s the inverse of the 2000’s Cubs…who built a stellar pitching staff (until injury and attrition took over obviously) and used the rest of the farm (and money) to land position players. There’s no such thing as a farm system that’s great at both unless that franchise has tanked for a long, long time (Rays, Royals…and the Royals farm is only now bearing fruit).
by SenorGato on Aug 9, 2011 5:14 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Butchered a major point...
I do not think that just because the Cubs had to trade prospects to land cornerstone players that it serves as some kind of indictment against the franchise/FO because other teams have to LIKE THE PROSPECTS for that to happen.
Fixed.
I went to the game last night ...
so I’m just seeing this (ahem) response (I kid, I kid). I will answer respectfully:
I know I should focus on the past because the past is somehow more more meaningful than what’s going on right now.
This is a really odd comment. I know Castro and Soto have been with the team, but the rest of the improved farm system is, well, still in the farm system.
I even get that since they didn’t accomplish what arbitrary goals of the fans when it comes to a farm system we should retroactively punish them for it.
Well, no one said Hendry should be gone simply because he has a bad track record developing position players. That’s just one of several marks against him.
I know I should be focusing on the flaws of the Cubs farm system rather than what they’ve produced
Actually, I’m focusing on what they produced. You’re focusing on what they might be producing
because the Cubs haven’t won a WS with that farm system and therefore failed.
Actually, I’m focusing on Jim Hendry’s 10 years as GM.
because the Cubs had to trade prospects to land cornerstone players (like the ahem other franchise would do and has done, hi Austin Jackson) because other teams have to LIKE THE PROSPECTS for that to happen.
Hendry did a good job (in 2003-04) of spinning prospects for talent. But those prospects didn’t pan out. I don’t see how that fundamentally alters this criticism of Hendry.
Phil Hughes is the first Yankee SP prospect who might be a long term TOR SP option for the Yankees since Pettite (unless you’re a Ramiro Mendoza fan).
See JamesCrocketts’ comments about why comparing the Cubs and Yankees farm systems is a bad idea.
There’s no such thing as a farm system that’s great at both unless that franchise has tanked for a long, long time (Rays, Royals…and the Royals farm is only now bearing fruit).
I’m not asking for a ‘great’ farm system. I’m looking for one that can produce more position players. Two All-Stars in 10 years (more if you count Hendry’s time as farm director) isn’t close to great. It’s not even mediocre.
.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
by elgato on Aug 10, 2011 8:29 AM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
I would be willing to give Hendry a pass on the positional talent
if we had a couple homegrown TOR guys either producing now or about to produce but we have a farm system full of complementary guys and Brett Jackson
by hansman1982 on Aug 10, 2011 10:25 AM CDT up reply actions
The Prior injury ...
and resulting ineffectiveness was such a huge blow to the organization. Prior-Zambrano at the TOR from 2003-present? Wow.
Hendry has been better about developing pitchers — and he’s been unlucky in that area. I’m not sure what he could have done to predict Prior’s injuries or Rich Hill’s Rich Hillness.
But Hendry’s still done a terrible job with position players. And I don’t think he has bad luck to fall back on in that area.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
and it could go back
to SG’s argument that Hendry had a limited budget for all of that and decided to pursue arms over bats
I go back and forth on Hednry a lot – if he was told to damn everything and just win now circa 2005-2006 (which probably would have been when the Tribune began internal discussions to sell the Cubs) then he did a pretty good job of that and seasons such as this are what happens when you do that without a farm system.
At the end of the day I still think he needs to go just so we can put the 2000’s Cubs behind us and rebuild with a new owner. It could be that Jim knew this would be his last season sometime around Pinella’s last days – that would make the offseason coaching moves much more explainable (giving the proverbial gold watch to a few of his buddies in a lost season) other than saying he is suddenly the worst GM in all of baseball.
by hansman1982 on Aug 10, 2011 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions
We have no way of knowing ...
if Tribune was getting ready to sell in 2005-06. Hell, if they were, why didn’t they open the wallet (at the expense of developing players) until after 2006? Did they think the 2006 team would be enticing for possible owners?
And, as has been pointed out, position players developed by Hendry have a remarkably low success rate. This is the case, even if pitching was considered king.
I think your last point — turn-the-page logic — is just another reason to get rid of Hendry. But it’s certainly not the only one.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
They traded for Juan Pierre, dude.
How can you not call that enticing?
FIRE JIM HENDRY. Injuries aren't the problem.
I know you're kidding, shoe.
But even the Pierre trade doesn’t help Hendry on this point. He traded THREE PITCHERS for Pierre.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
We are rebuilding with a new owner.
It’s just that most are turning a blind eye to it because the recent W-L records override all that.
We're not talking about a new owner.
We’re talking about the GM the new owner chose to retain.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
by elgato on Aug 10, 2011 10:55 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Possibly because the new owner
finds he works well with that GM, as if reported.
...with fantastic results.
--------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Aug 11, 2011 2:57 AM CDT up reply actions
Hey where'd the goal posts go?
Yes, it’s well understood that the big league club isn’t winning.
I'm not the one...
who’s putting any credence into a working relationship between an owner who doesn’t know anything about baseball and a GM who’s run this franchise into the ground. Maybe this is why owners have presidents, etc., in between them and the baseball people.
--------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Aug 11, 2011 12:10 PM CDT up reply actions
'Run this franchise into the ground'
Really?
by Not Bruce Froemming on Aug 11, 2011 12:43 PM CDT up reply actions
87 losses followed by ...
what looks like 90+plus losses?
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
What would you call two straight fifth place finishes?
Fire Jim Hendry. Injuries aren't the problem
by Nunyabidness on Aug 11, 2011 2:01 PM CDT up reply actions
I'll defend Hendry for a second...
it’s not like he started off from a great point… but 2 playoff appearances and no playoff wins since 2003 just isn’t nearly enough for the state the franchise is in now.
--------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Aug 11, 2011 3:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Which says nothing good about Ricketts.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
This is a really odd comment. I know Castro and Soto have been with the team, but the rest of the improved farm system is, well, still in the farm system.
Actually, I’m focusing on what they produced. You’re focusing on what they might be producing
Actually, I’m focusing on Jim Hendry’s 10 years as GM.
No, I’m focusing on what they’ve very recently produced, which also happens to fall within Hendry’s 10 year tenure as a GM.
Just as the farm system was loaded with TOR potential arms in the early part of his tenure as GM, the second half of the ten years has seen two All Star players at SS and C, two of the most valuable positions in baseball. Their next prospect in line is a CF, another up the middle prospect. There’s also Barney and his 2010 version Tyler Colvin, a potential something who showed flashes in a half season then saw a dropoff.
Hendry did a good job (in 2003-04) of spinning prospects for talent. But those prospects didn’t pan out. I don’t see how that fundamentally alters this criticism of Hendry.
Fundamentally it doesn’t alter what you’re arguing and is a great benefit to it.
Realistically, that’s what prospects are for. Prospects are here to bring value to the franchise, and again, other teams have to be interested in the prospects to trade talents like the Cubs got for them. That’s what matters. Hendry’s job was to make the Cubs better, not the minor leagues, during his GM tenure. That’s why he got the GM of the major league team job, and not the farm director job.
I’m not asking for a ‘great’ farm system. I’m looking for one that can produce more position players. Two All-Stars in 10 years (more if you count Hendry’s time as farm director) isn’t close to great. It’s not even mediocre.
The two All Stars are within the past 4 years. Neither is 30 year. One spent most of this season at 21 years old. Also, mediocre compared to what? Arbitrary expectations or real life?
Again, SG ...
you’re not JUST focusing on what has very recently been produced. You’re lumping in Barney (who would be a backup on a good team), Colvin (who looks like he lost everything that made him good last year) and Jackson (who might not see the majors until 2012).
So, we’re back to two position player All-Stars in 10 years as GM and several years earlier as farm director.
And Hendry’s job wasn’t to simply make the big-league club better. It was to build a strong organization. He’s in charge of all baseball operations.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
It's early.
I meant to say you’re not JUST focusing on what has very recently been produced that’s been very good. Which was how this whole argument got started.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Were not going to agree.
At all. Hendrys job as a GM is to make the major league team perform, and they did that during his first decade. His job as a farm director was to make sure the farm was stocked to help out the big club, and that farm system fed the machine for a stretch.
You find it insignificant that those two ASs have come in the last 4 years, I don’t. You see no difference in between the pitching heavy system that marked his early years as GM/late years as farm director and today’s system that’s loaded with position guys and has produced two very good up the middle MLB talents, I do.
Also, if Jeff f’n Karstens can be called upon as proof the Yankees can develop starting then Barney/Colvin can get a mention.
FYI: you can’t build a top to bottom organization without ownership. Hendry worked with ownership trying to pump up the value of the ML team so they could sell the team. Now, we see the farm system filling out again as the ML team drops 40+ million at the end of the year….aka plenty of room to go up.
by SenorGato on Aug 11, 2011 1:28 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
I'm ready to be done with this, but I want to make this final post.
If Jim Hendry was hired in 2005 or 2006, then the Tribune’s efforts to sell the team could be factored in when assessing Hendry’s impact on the farm system. But he was hired as GM in 2002 and was director of the farm system prior to that.
And I do see a difference between the pitching talent Hendry brought up in 2002-03 (which I’ve given him credit for) and the two AS position players (Soto and Castro) and a bunch of might-bes in Iowa and below. I think you continue to give Hendry credit for guys that might be the next Felix Pie.
But we can be done. We’ve spilled enough virtual ink on this.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
But he was hired as GM in 2002 and was director of the farm system prior to that
Yes, and the 2003 and 2004 Cubs teams were two of the most exciting teams this franchise has fielded in decades. They were built by Hendry.
After 2005/2006, the agenda changed, and things worked a little more hurriedly. That sucks, but oh well.
And I do see a difference between the pitching talent Hendry brought up in 2002-03 (which I’ve given him credit for) and the two AS position players (Soto and Castro) and a bunch of might-bes in Iowa and below. I think you continue to give Hendry credit for guys that might be the next Felix Pie.
I think you continue to work under the assumption that that these prospects even resemble Felix Pie. The closest to a Pie clone in today’s system is Junior Lake, a high K/low BB tools laden, premium position playing, young IFA. Lake is a borderline top 10 prospect in the system, and probably not even a top 5 position player prospect. You’re choosing to look at things in a vacuum, and that’s fine. I’m choosing to not do that. These position prospects are better than the last crop, and Soto/Castro have already shown to be proof of that.
We’re not going to agree on this. So it probably is best to agree to not agree.
You're moving goal posts again.
1) You can’t just dismiss the results of the farm for two years by saying “after 2005/2006, the agenda changed.”
2) I’m not saying the guys in the farm will be EXACTLY like Felix Pie. I’m saying they could end up disappointing us in a manner similar to Pie. I’m just saying that banking on prospects (most of whom haven’t played in the bigs) is very, very premature.
3) Giving Hendry credit for 2004 is kinda funny. He badly misfired on LaTroy Hawkins, arguably misfired getting Barrett for Damian Miller and gutted the 2003 team of its OBP, leadership, and made it more right-handed. It was a smaller version of the bad tinkering he did after 2008.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
1 – Dude, 2005/2006/2007/2008 were not years where the franchise was looking to build up it’s farm system. That’s not moving the goal posts, that’s a fact.
2 – Of course there will be disappointments. That’s part of the whole farm system. They’re called prospects because they’re prospecting for an MLB career, not because they have it or are guaranteed it.
3 – Hawkins was signed as a set up man, and was one of the best relievers in the game when he was signed.
Michael Barrett 2004 (27):
.287/.337/.489/.826
Damien Miller 2003 (33):
.233/.310/.369/.680
2003 team OBP: .323
2004 team OBP: .328
2003 team OPS: .739
2004 team OPS: .786 (is listing this more moving goal posts btw?)
Patterson threw up a 5.2 WAR season to replace Lofton, who was only here in ’03 because Patterson went down (and Hendry traded for him with Ramirez). Oh, and in ’04 some guy named Derrek Lee was added via another lucky trade for our nincompoop GM.
Not to mention that 2004 saw Prior/Wood go from 422+ innings in ’03 to less than 300 between them….and a dropoff from Borowski….maybe that has something to do with….Yeah no, it was signing a good reliever, trading for a younger better catcher, and getting RH (who cares that Lee and Barrett were better, replacing RH hitters IIRC, younger…). Hindsight is one hell of a drug….
That's ridiculous.
So it’s cool for a team to stop building its farm system? That makes absolutely no sense.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
I was quite amazed by that assertion as well.
The lengths some people will go to, I suppose.
FIRE JIM HENDRY. Injuries aren't the problem.
It does if you love that Jim Hendry has run your favorite team into the ground.
--------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Aug 12, 2011 6:31 PM CDT up reply actions
It doesn't cut it because it doesn't excuse Hendry from drafting better
Fire Jim Hendry. Injuries aren't the problem.
by Shanghai Badger on Aug 10, 2011 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Or having coaches work on developing minor leaguers.
It’s not like the Cubs went a couple years without even fielding position players in the minors, though it may have seemed that way (where have you gone, Kevin Orie, where have you gone??).
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
So when the farm system was highly ranked it was just an accident?
FIRE JIM HENDRY. Injuries aren't the problem.
It might go well with the old adage of, "Even a blind squirrel finds a nut."
Just because something isn’t drawing focus doesn’t mean the people that were working on the farm didn’t care. They didn’t have a lot of resources for it, but obviously made the most of what they had.
It also doesn’t hurt that from 1997-2002 the Cubs finished: 4, 5, 2, 6, 6, 3, and 5th in the Central respectively. Having 5 of 6 years with a very high draft pick make the retooling process easier, even if you are cheap with it.
I think he may
be better suited to be a Minor League Director…for all the belly-aching that is going on over Hendry the Cubs did have a top farm system in 2003 – granted that was on the strength of pitching but he did develop 3 REALLY good SP – 2 of which were derailed by injuries
No, I'd say it was helped by...
spending (the Trib footed the bill for Prior in ’01 for instance) and an organization that focused on building it up using a bunch of top 5 and top 10 picks.
Hendry didn’t have that luxury during the mid-2000’s, and really he probably shouldn’t have since that was the time to feed the ML team.
I'm not saying you're wrong.
But is there a link or something that proves that the Cubs didn’t care about building the farm during the time span you’re citing?
FIRE JIM HENDRY. Injuries aren't the problem.
No link...
Here’s my arrogance popping up again so I’ll give you the heads up before you read it…just common sense.
They saw an opportunity with the pitching that late 90’s/early 2000’s farm system produced, they poured money and prospects (aka non-monetary baseball currency) into getting an offense on the field behind that pitching, and things rolled until they fell apart.
I don't think it's simply common sense.
I see a string of putrid first round picks, and it looks to me like they simply did a bad job.
FIRE JIM HENDRY. Injuries aren't the problem.
The 2000's draft picks that busted....
post-Prior:
2002 – Brownlie – Considered the best college pitcher in the draft. Fell due to injuries, but was considered a top 10 talent that fell to 21.
2003 – Ryan Harvey – Aka the Bubba Starling of his draft.
2004 – No first round pick.
2005 – Mark Pawelek – Considered one of the most talented LH pitchers in the draft with an excellent fastball/breaking ball combo.
2006 – Tyler Colvin – Just made it up.
2007 – Josh Vitters – 21 in AA, but the prevailing opinion is that he’s disappointing anyway.
2008 – Andrew Cashner – Injured, but made it to the big leagues in 2 years and could be in September and then 2012’s rotation.
Obviously alot of those guys never developed, but that’s not exactly a rare thing in baseball. Alot of those guys were considered steals on draft day.
I should have stopped at '05...
As we’re just seeing the early results of the drafts in the mid-late 2000’s.
I'm not really sure what you're trying to prove.
I don’t see the value in what was said at the time, since clearly some of these players didn’t pan out. To me, that’s all that matters.
FIRE JIM HENDRY. Injuries aren't the problem.
Plus if "good" comes up more often then the system is...
more geared to producing something potentially great (like Castro).
Also, we can buy great….like Prince Fielder/Albert Pujols this offseason. Like the Yankees bought CC and Tex.
Sure shot HOFers who have come up and disappointed because they weren't messiahs?
Who are you even referring to? The Cubs haven’t brought up any consistent position players since the 1980s. I agree that the Cubs need a steady stream of young cheap talent, I just don’t know who in the past 20 years has been projected to be great.
Corey Patterson and Felix Pie.
Where have you gone, Kiko Calero. A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.
Projected to be great?
Choi, Patterson, Hill, Dopirak (remember him?), Pie, Harvey, Murton was projected to be solid, randomly Glanville was drafted in ’91 so he fits…Castro in recent years…Soto was really well liked…
Only Patterson and Pie were expected to be "great" on that list
Choi was expected to be very good, Glanville and Hill solid. Murton wasn’t drafted/signed by us (acquired via trade after most of his minor league development was done), so you probably shouldn’t include that type of player (doing so makes our organization look worse by comparison). Castro wasn’t in the minors long enough to develop a consensus opinion (he exploded nearly out of nowhere). And Soto was looking like a journeyman backup catcher until he had a completely unexpected offensive explosion in his third try at Iowa (hitting 26 HR when he previously had a career-high of 27 total XBH). Harvey and Dopirak never impressed above A ball, and were never really projected to be great by outsiders. Both were just overrated by the Cubs due to the poor farm system at the time.
So basically we had two (maybe three) guys who were top-tier position prospects projected to be stars, and two guys who emerged quickly/unexpectedly and became All-stars, and another guy or two who projected to be solid.
No Choi was one of the best prospects in baseball...
There were a whole lot of people who thought that guy would mash.
Forgot Murton was in Boston.
Castro was known to prospect guys, though you’re right that no one but the Cubs really had a feel on the guy. I didn’t even buy Castro the prospect…
Soto was 21 by the time he hit AA and was well liked by scouting services like Baseball America. He was a C, and by nature his bat came around later than what would be deemed appropriate, but that was often acknowledged on his way up.
Harvey and Dopirak were overrated by everyone….not just the Cubs (if the Cubs even stayed high on them for long). One was considered a talent who might go #1 in his draft, and the other was said to have power that rivaled anyone in the minors when he was a hot prospect. I think you confuse services like Baseball America’s opinion (who didn’t have a strong feel on Castro for instance, raved about Dopirak and ranked him the #1 prospect in the system) with the Cubs (who clearly saw something different with Castro, and kept Dopirak in Low A during the year he was the top prospect in the system).
I reiterate...
Castro, Soto, Harvey, and Dopirak weren’t expected to be great (which was the words you used).
Dopirak was a 2nd round pick who had one great year in A ball and jumped to the top of the Cubs’ prospect list (when we were a lowly-rated farm system). He quickly jumped back down the next year. He was never expected to be great – just a high-ceiling guy. Harvey was a raw kid who went 6th and never figured it out. His ceiling was great, but he wasn’t widely expected to be great. Soto was a passable prospect, but not expected to be great. He was considered a solid defensive prospect with a nice eye at the plate but no power. The power was a big surprise to pretty much everyone.
by SouthernCub on Aug 10, 2011 10:43 PM CDT up reply actions
Cool.
Though I competent disagree on Castro, who earned raves. The Cubs certainly saw something resembling greatness, and he was the 16th best prospect in baseball according to BA as a 19 going on 20 year old….
I can agree on the other guys….though all got over he top hype from scouting services, especially the ones that love tools.
by SenorGato on Aug 11, 2011 1:03 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
That was a pointless post by Sickels
It felt like he was mailing it in – there are at least 15 people on BCB who could have made the same post he did. No real insight whatsoever.
It's a simple question, Doctor: would you eat the moon if it were made of ribs??
In Sickels's defense
It was geared mostly towards non-Cubs fans. BJax is pretty unheralded outside of Cubs circles. I blame Keith Law.
BTW, did anybody catch Keith Law awhile ago, where he said that Ben Revere is what all Cubs fans hope Matt Szczur turns out like? Yes, the same Ben Revere that has hit 5 career minor league HRs in over 1600 PA’s. We’ll just ignore the fact that Szczur has 7 HRs in under a 1/3 of the PAs. Sorry, just had to vent a little about the absurdity that is Keith Law.
Keith Law is horrible.
I don’t understand his logic behind some of his ratings – and to leave Jackson out of his top 100 prospects only adds more fuel to the fire.
'Never look down on anybody unless you're helping him up.'
Law isn't horrible, he just gets very biased at times against certain types of players.
Once he gets an image in his head of what a player will project to be, that player will never get out of his dog house.
He also makes rankings for shock value
He gets some good info, but a lot of the stuff he puts out is only to get more readers. He’s lost a lot of credibility in my book.
Like Hak Ju Lee as a top 10 prospect...
Or Carlos Martinez in the top 5….
Honestly though, there’s much worse out there than Law.
Oh, no doubt
I still prefer him to Pilliere. But he’s a few notches below the likes of Callis, Badler or Goldstein, IMO.
I guess you don't read him regularly.
He does those type of reports on a regular basis on prospects who are promoted or playing well.
As mentioned, it is directed at baseball fans in general, not Cubs fans.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
Yep, I love them to learn about other teams prospects...
When I see one for a Cubs (not often), I typically jump to comments because there isn’t much to learn if you know the player and follow their career path.
jackson
I cover 30 teams and post five of these pieces a week. Fans of the 29 other teams don’t know as much about Jackson as Cubs fans do. Prospect of the Day isn’t intended to be an in-depth summary of the player…the point is to introduce the guy to the general fan.
by John Sickels on Aug 9, 2011 10:53 AM CDT up reply actions 7 recs
Definitely appreciated John.
Brett Jackson deserves the recognition and I appreciate him getting the spotlight for a bit on more places than just a Cubs blog.
no prob
I just wanted to clarify what these reports are supposed to do and who they are aimed at. It’s sort of a freshman-level intro piece.
by John Sickels on Aug 9, 2011 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions
maybe because you write like a freshman
HAHAHAHAHA I am only kidding, nice writeup – I moderately follow the Cubs minor league system and this was still a nice piece for me to put all the pieces together from what I read here.
Nope, I think anyone that follows Minorleagueball.com is aware of the pieces.
It’s a great quick read to catch up on some people who may have slipped through the cracks on top 100 lists that are breaking out, or just guys that don’t get national exposure on major media outlets.
Thank you, John.
It’s not like people couldn’t look up more of your thoughts and analysis on him and other Cubs players, if they really wanted to do something other than complain. People might just be learning about Jackson because of his “hot streak”, and it’s great that you put it in perspective and let people know that are still glaring concerns about his overall offensive game as it might play in the majors.
--------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Aug 9, 2011 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
"glaring concerns"
I don’t think that’s really true… he strikes out too much as a result of being overly patient at times. I don’t think anyone would say he has “glaring concerns,” otherwise he wouldn’t be a top 50 prospect in AAA ready to come to the majors.
Are you secretly Keith Law?
Actually not sure any more time in Iowa is beneficial
I say move DeWitt and drop Campana till September and bring up Jackson and Flaherty. Start playing Jackson in LF over Soriano against RH starters and platoon Flaherty with Barney and let us see what we have here.
Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."
I think transitioning Jackson as a corner OF'er would be smart but
if that is a problem move Byrd to LF (replacing Soriano) and play Colvin in RF and see what we have
Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."
I can even argue to move Byrd to RF against LH'ers and play Soriano in LF and Jackson in CF
either way let us use these games as a development time
Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."
Transition to a corner OF?
Why would you want to do that? A significant amount of Jackson’s value is his ability to play CF.
This...
Until he develops more power or outgrows CF, he should be there unless pushed off by a better prospect.
I meant the following:
If the issue was worrying whether adjusting to MLB level play/pitching and also being the captain of the OF as the CF, than I wouldn’t mind Jackson playing 20 games in the corner until he takes over CF.
The issue is getting him on the field and in the lineup first, then finding a defensive position.
Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."
Let's not mess with him too much, please.
Let’s stick him in one spot and let him learn the position and play it.
agree
at this point its start Jackson in CF and find time/postions for everyone else
by hansman1982 on Aug 10, 2011 10:31 AM CDT up reply actions
like any of us are deciding anything
we might have more influence changing the Cubs rain out policy
Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."
Best looking prospect
Not talking baseball tools…physically gorgeous the girls and gay fans appreciate the hotties!!
BJax had a finger injury
sliding into a base early in May. When he returned his BA sunk to .183 during the first month back. Since then it’s been .308. His added OBP because of walks has consistently been close to 100 points higher.
With MLB trending to lower scoring games speed, fielding and OBP has become a higher value. His only limitation is a high K rate. Other than that, he should be a long time quality starter in the OF.
If it wasn't for the injuries, we'd be printing WS tickets right now.
good article on Jackson & Flaherty
good article.
This statement really stick out to me:
Strikeouts are always going to be a part of what he does, as a tiny loop and some length in a swing will do that to a guy, but his mix of pop, patience, and discipline while manning center field doesn’t come around too often.
The boldfaced part is what has the potential to make BJax a special type of player.
THe Flaherty review just confirms what most of us thought, he’s going to be a versatile player who can fill in adequately at multiple positions and hit enough to stick around the major leagues for a while, I think DeRosa would be a pretty good ceiling for comparison.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bleed Cubbie Blue
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Chicago Cubs Game Threads
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
