Login

veryzer · 11-20-2009, 11:25 AM

QUOTE (Dirk @ Nov 20 2009, 09:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Nov 20 2009, 10:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dirk @ Nov 20 2009, 09:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Nov 20 2009, 08:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dirk @ Nov 19 2009, 04:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Coach @ Nov 19 2009, 03:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE ("Jayson Stark")One scout's review of the best player he saw in the Arizona Fall League -- 19-year-old Cubs middle-infield stud Starlin Castro: "A young Hanley Ramirez."
</div>
I know some people have scoffed at the Hanley Ramirez comparisons because of Castro's lack of power, but Ramirez hit a grand total of 29 hrs in about 400 minor league games. Just sayin.
</div>

I will say this - Castro's minor league numbers, so far, compare pretty favorably to Ramirez's at the same age.

I am not anti-Castro. I'd probably put him as the one or two prospect in the system, too. I just don't want us to fall victim to the same old problem we've had with prospects whom other teams might salivate over. Statistically, most stud prospects do not pan out.
</div>
Statistically as in, there's no mathematical evidence per se, you just kind of made it up? More like, you've seen the Cubs get burned by a few guys who didn't pan out and now it seems like no hyped prospect is ever going to pan out? The Cubs should be able to evaluate every minor leaguer independently. If you're going to take the stance that it is statistically unlikely that a 'stud' prospect is going to amount to much then why not make it an organizational policy that the second any guy has relative minor league success and receives any kind of media attention, it's time to trade him right away. (just make sure you get more than Curtis Granderson in return)
</div>

if that's the way ace feels, isn't it understandable? there's is a literal laundry list of cub prospects that were supposed to be the next big thing and almost none of them has panned out, or if they did, it was for a year or two.

i really don't know shit about castro, but when i hear the hyperbole surrounding this guy, i have a hard time not rolling my eyes. based solely on past experience, i'd trade this guy now while he still has value, that's me. it's based on nothing but my ample gut, which when it comes to the cubs, is right more than it's wrong.

just my opinion, rip it if you want. i've been cubbed for too long now to get excited about a 19 year old kid. the next hanley ramirez? sure, no problem.
</div>
You know what- I actually don't know much about Castro myself other than a cursory glance at his stats. He could be completely over-hyped, he could be the next Hanley Ramirez, I have no idea, that's not really my point. I understand the trepidation over a Cubs prospect when the track record is not good. I even think a healthy amount of cynicism when it comes to prospects is a very good thing. My whole thing is this- we have to be able to independently evaluate every prospect and not just lump them in with Corey Patterson and Felix Pie and unload them to the first team that dangles a .250 hitter in our face. Them, if the evaluation comes back that the guy probably won't live up to the hype, shit man, trade em. Just make sure you get maximum value.
</div>

obviously, you're right. but until one of these guys pans out, i'm lumping them. call me lumpy.

Scarey · 11-20-2009, 11:26 AM

QUOTE (veryzer @ Nov 20 2009, 11:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>if that's the way ace feels, isn't it understandable? there's is a literal laundry list of cub prospects that were supposed to be the next big thing and almost none of them has panned out, or if they did, it was for a year or two.

If the Cubs had the same people in place that they did when all those other guys came through and busted, I could understand your reasoning. However, you're basically saying that guys like Castro are going to fail just because they're Cubs.

That's insane. Really it is. It's like believe the Cubs are cursed. That they have bad luck and will never have their prospects amount to anything because they're the Cubs.

I think you see what has happened with trading for Lee, and Ramirez. You've seen us sign guys like Lilly, Soriano, and Fukudome and built a pretty damn good team. The problem is it's very abnormal to build a team strictly by trading for players and signing free agents. The result of that problem is a maxed out payroll and zero flexibility with the roster like this offseason.

You can't go forever taking other teams players. Even the Yankees have plenty of their own home grown talent. To be a successful MLB club, you have to utilize your farm.

veryzer · 11-20-2009, 11:32 AM

guys like castro ARE gonna fail because they're cubs and the cubs ARE cursed. am i insane? possibly. am i right? probably.

look, i don't believe in curse's and hexes and bad luck and goats and cats and blah blah blah.......unless we're talking about the cubs. the cubs defy rationality. talk to me when you're 40 and the cubs still haven't won shit and castro has been out of baseball for years and tell me i'm wrong.

Scarey · 11-20-2009, 11:49 AM

QUOTE (veryzer @ Nov 20 2009, 11:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>guys like castro ARE gonna fail because they're cubs and the cubs ARE cursed. am i insane? possibly. am i right? probably.

look, i don't believe in curse's and hexes and bad luck and goats and cats and blah blah blah.......unless we're talking about the cubs. the cubs defy rationality. talk to me when you're 40 and the cubs still haven't won shit and castro has been out of baseball for years and tell me i'm wrong.

Crazy.

veryzer · 11-20-2009, 02:42 PM

QUOTE (Scarey @ Nov 20 2009, 09:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Nov 20 2009, 11:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>guys like castro ARE gonna fail because they're cubs and the cubs ARE cursed. am i insane? possibly. am i right? probably.

look, i don't believe in curse's and hexes and bad luck and goats and cats and blah blah blah.......unless we're talking about the cubs. the cubs defy rationality. talk to me when you're 40 and the cubs still haven't won shit and castro has been out of baseball for years and tell me i'm wrong.

Crazy.
</div>

*shrug*

Ace · 11-20-2009, 06:45 PM

QUOTE (Dirk @ Nov 20 2009, 10:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (veryzer @ Nov 20 2009, 10:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dirk @ Nov 20 2009, 09:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ Nov 20 2009, 08:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dirk @ Nov 19 2009, 04:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Coach @ Nov 19 2009, 03:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE ("Jayson Stark")One scout's review of the best player he saw in the Arizona Fall League -- 19-year-old Cubs middle-infield stud Starlin Castro: "A young Hanley Ramirez."
</div>
I know some people have scoffed at the Hanley Ramirez comparisons because of Castro's lack of power, but Ramirez hit a grand total of 29 hrs in about 400 minor league games. Just sayin.
</div>

I will say this - Castro's minor league numbers, so far, compare pretty favorably to Ramirez's at the same age.

I am not anti-Castro. I'd probably put him as the one or two prospect in the system, too. I just don't want us to fall victim to the same old problem we've had with prospects whom other teams might salivate over. Statistically, most stud prospects do not pan out.
</div>
Statistically as in, there's no mathematical evidence per se, you just kind of made it up? More like, you've seen the Cubs get burned by a few guys who didn't pan out and now it seems like no hyped prospect is ever going to pan out? The Cubs should be able to evaluate every minor leaguer independently. If you're going to take the stance that it is statistically unlikely that a 'stud' prospect is going to amount to much then why not make it an organizational policy that the second any guy has relative minor league success and receives any kind of media attention, it's time to trade him right away. (just make sure you get more than Curtis Granderson in return)
</div>

if that's the way ace feels, isn't it understandable? there's is a literal laundry list of cub prospects that were supposed to be the next big thing and almost none of them has panned out, or if they did, it was for a year or two.

i really don't know shit about castro, but when i hear the hyperbole surrounding this guy, i have a hard time not rolling my eyes. based solely on past experience, i'd trade this guy now while he still has value, that's me. it's based on nothing but my ample gut, which when it comes to the cubs, is right more than it's wrong.

just my opinion, rip it if you want. i've been cubbed for too long now to get excited about a 19 year old kid. the next hanley ramirez? sure, no problem.
</div>
You know what- I actually don't know much about Castro myself other than a cursory glance at his stats. He could be completely over-hyped, he could be the next Hanley Ramirez, I have no idea, that's not really my point. I understand the trepidation over a Cubs prospect when the track record is not good. I even think a healthy amount of cynicism when it comes to prospects is a very good thing. My whole thing is this- we have to be able to independently evaluate every prospect and not just lump them in with Corey Patterson and Felix Pie and unload them to the first team that dangles a .250 hitter in our face. Them, if the evaluation comes back that the guy probably won't live up to the hype, shit man, trade em. Just make sure you get maximum value.

</div>

Dirk, it's not in any way irrational to take the position that when a young player reaches max hype, it is worth exploring trades for him. That's all I've said, and you've all but agreed. I haven't "lumped" Castro in with anyone else in any other capacity than that.

Further, I said repeatedly that I'm NOT advocating trading Castro for Granderson. I'm simply saying that it's worth considering. Considering and ultimately saying no? Maybe. But it's worth that conversation. Castro is still just a kid.

kbwsb · 11-21-2009, 04:22 AM

As much as I <i>love</i> what I hear about Castro, if we could trade straight up, him for Granderson, I'd do it.

But the Tigers would probably want Vitters too, and now you're<i> really</i> castrating our farm system.

Clapp · 11-21-2009, 07:24 PM

If we were the Red Sox, I'd be all for Granderson and expect him to play like he did a couple years ago. But we're not. He'll be what he was last year at best in a Cubs uni.

cherp · 11-22-2009, 01:03 AM

I know nothing about this kid - heard his name a bunch recently. Has anyone seen him? From what I read, he seems like a good IF glove with no pop, a .290 ba. and a .350ish obp

Luis Castillo?

Or do people see more upside than that?

I was very surprised to see BA put him over Vitters.

Scarey · 11-22-2009, 07:07 AM

QUOTE (cherp @ Nov 22 2009, 12:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I know nothing about this kid - heard his name a bunch recently. Has anyone seen him? From what I read, he seems like a good IF glove with no pop, a .290 ba. and a .350ish obp

Luis Castillo?

Or do people see more upside than that?

I was very surprised to see BA put him over Vitters.

He projects as a higher BA type guy. He can take a walk has not shown above average patience at this point. He projects for more power because of his frame. He has an excellent arm excellent range at short. They say he's very advanced defensively despite a marginally high error total this year. He runs better than average and seems to be a smart base stealer because of his high base stealing %. He is fantastic at putting the bat on the ball and rarely strikes out.

It's hard to put a whole lot of player comparisons on him because he's only 19 years old. Some people have gone to the extreme of comparing him to Hanley Ramirez. I'm not sure I'd go that far. One comparison I've heard that sounds pretty good is Edgar Rentaria when he was known for his defensive prowess. I think his ceiling would be a Jimmy Rollins type which I would love.

cherp · 11-22-2009, 06:36 PM

QUOTE (Scarey @ Nov 22 2009, 05:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Nov 22 2009, 12:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I know nothing about this kid - heard his name a bunch recently. Has anyone seen him? From what I read, he seems like a good IF glove with no pop, a .290 ba. and a .350ish obp

Luis Castillo?

Or do people see more upside than that?

I was very surprised to see BA put him over Vitters.

He projects as a higher BA type guy. He can take a walk has not shown above average patience at this point. He projects for more power because of his frame. He has an excellent arm excellent range at short. They say he's very advanced defensively despite a marginally high error total this year. He runs better than average and seems to be a smart base stealer because of his high base stealing %. He is fantastic at putting the bat on the ball and rarely strikes out.

It's hard to put a whole lot of player comparisons on him because he's only 19 years old. Some people have gone to the extreme of comparing him to Hanley Ramirez. I'm not sure I'd go that far. One comparison I've heard that sounds pretty good is Edgar Rentaria when he was known for his defensive prowess. I think his ceiling would be a Jimmy Rollins type which I would love.
</div>

Obviously he's too young to project power to...but he hasn't shown the power of those guys yet. That would be awesome for the Cubs to develop a MI who actually can hit and field. At his age, we likely don't see him until Sept of 2011 at the earliest?

Have you seen him Scarey?

Scarey · 11-22-2009, 06:47 PM

QUOTE (cherp @ Nov 22 2009, 05:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scarey @ Nov 22 2009, 05:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cherp @ Nov 22 2009, 12:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I know nothing about this kid - heard his name a bunch recently. Has anyone seen him? From what I read, he seems like a good IF glove with no pop, a .290 ba. and a .350ish obp

Luis Castillo?

Or do people see more upside than that?

I was very surprised to see BA put him over Vitters.

He projects as a higher BA type guy. He can take a walk has not shown above average patience at this point. He projects for more power because of his frame. He has an excellent arm excellent range at short. They say he's very advanced defensively despite a marginally high error total this year. He runs better than average and seems to be a smart base stealer because of his high base stealing %. He is fantastic at putting the bat on the ball and rarely strikes out.

It's hard to put a whole lot of player comparisons on him because he's only 19 years old. Some people have gone to the extreme of comparing him to Hanley Ramirez. I'm not sure I'd go that far. One comparison I've heard that sounds pretty good is Edgar Rentaria when he was known for his defensive prowess. I think his ceiling would be a Jimmy Rollins type which I would love.
</div>

Obviously he's too young to project power to...but he hasn't shown the power of those guys yet. That would be awesome for the Cubs to develop a MI who actually can hit and field. At his age, we likely don't see him until Sept of 2011 at the earliest?

Have you seen him Scarey?
</div>

I only saw him play the AFL futures game. Mostly what I know about him, like most people that are talking about him, is second hand from scouts and such.

Castro could very easily be in Chicago at some point in 2010. He's a major league glove already. His bat is very quick and he is very tough to strike out. It's these reasons that people are so high on him and with those tools, he could handle his own in MLB at this point.

And no, Castro has not shown Rentaria or Hanley Ramirez power yet... but neither did those guys at his age. That's why people are so confident in him building power,

***funkster*** · 11-22-2009, 07:13 PM

Exactly he's young...give him time to bulk up and he could develop some power.

ColoradoCub · 11-27-2009, 11:32 AM

QUOTE Chicago Cubs aren't going to rush Starlin Castro
But it's no secret 19-year-old shortstop is on the fast track

By Paul Sullivan Tribune reporter
November 27, 2009

If the Cubs start the 2010 season with Starlin Castro at shortstop, it won't be without the prodding of hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo.

Castro isn't on the 40-man roster, but he will get a spring training invite and an opportunity to break camp with the Cubs if he has an exceptional spring.

It's a long shot, considering Castro began the season in Class A last April and doesn't turn 20 until March 24. But the Cubs are so sold on his future that they already have told incumbent shortstop Ryan Theriot he might move to second base in the not-so-distant future.

How will the Cubs weigh the decision on whether Castro is ready?

By asking their newly designated "hitting guru."

"Rudy has a great track record with hitters, and you have a young man here who has had only six to eight weeks in Double A," general manager Jim Hendry said. "So you want to make sure everybody feels he has enough experience to make the jump.

"And once he gets here, you want to let him go. You don't want to put expectations on him, that he has to be here by a certain day, that it has to be Opening Day or by the All-Star break. You let him dictate when he's ready by the way he plays, the way he carries himself and how he adjusts. No one in house is worried about it because Theriot is a real good player and we're certainly prepared to play without (Castro), with Ryan coming back after a couple of successful years."

Cubs fans have learned the hard way not to fall in love with highly touted prospects after the rise and fall of center fielders Corey Patterson and Felix Pie.

Castro was a relative unknown a year ago, but suddenly he's the focus of the future.

Castro, who finished sixth in the Arizona Fall League with a .376 average, was named the team's top prospect last week by Baseball America. That put him above first-round draft picks Brett Jackson (ranked No. 2), Josh Vitters (No. 3), Andrew Cashner (No. 4) and Tyler Colvin, who did not even make the top 10.

Over the last eight months, Castro has gone from unheralded to untouchable. The Cubs like him so much, it's believed they will refuse to discuss him in any offseason trade talk, even for a hot commodity such as Tigers center fielder Curtis Granderson. Hendry, Jaramillo and manager Lou Piniella are eager to see what Castro can do in Cactus League play in March, when media and fan scrutiny is certain to be magnified.

"When you get to the Double-A level and you go to the fall league and you play like that, you're on the right kind of track," Hendry said. "We certainly want to get him the extra work in major league camp. Let's all see where he's at by the beginning stages of camp and at the end. He's turning 20, so he's obviously on a very fast track."

In his first year above Rookie ball, Castro hit a combined .299 at Daytona, the Cubs' high Class A team, and Double-A Tennessee. He finished with three home runs, 23 doubles, 49 RBIs and a .342 on-base percentage.

But with only 111 at-bats in Double A, is Castro ready for the big jump?

Experience may work against him, but some teams are bringing up prospects they deem ready at a quicker-than-usual pace, as evidenced by the comet-like ascensions of the White Sox's Gordon Beckham and the Rays' Evan Longoria. The Sox called up Beckham, the No. 8 pick of the 2008 draft, after only 205 combined at-bats at Class A and Double A and 28 at Triple-A Charlotte.

Hendry agreed the trend is growing, citing the reduction of college baseball scholarships and improved scouting in places such as the Dominican Republic and Venezuela. The best players are identified earlier and separate themselves from the pack faster, Hendry said.

"Beckham at a young age, with the maturity level he has shown, his (success) certainly bodes well for not only himself, but for others," he said. "It shows the outstanding guys can do it, and make it in a short period of time."

The Cubs don't want to appear as if they're rushing Castro, who still needs to fill out his 6-foot-1, 175-pound frame. And Hendry doesn't want his confidence in the kid to be interpreted as a lack of faith in Theriot, who had a disappointing finish to an otherwise strong season, hitting .240 over the final month to finish at .284.

Hendry has spoken to Theriot about his future.

"Ryan feels like if he has to change positions and move to second base, he would have no problems," Hendry said. "He has made it no secret he loves the Cubs and wants to stay.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...0,4875326.story

Brock · 11-27-2009, 11:15 PM

This is going to end badly, one way or another. No doubt in my mind.

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me