The Ryan Braun Controversy

I suppose I am a little late weighing in on this matter, but I have to agree with the critics there is something fishy here.  The real lesson is that baseball, in contrast to the Olympics, for example, is just not that serious about eliminating performance enhancing drugs.

The long and the short of it is this, gleaned from a variety of sources.  Ryan Braun tested positive for substances that could not be naturally produced in his body.  The test sample was delayed in transit and stored for 48 hours at the home of the tester where it was sealed and refrigerated.  It was impossible for the sample to degrade under these or actually most any conditions.  There was no break in the chain of custody, as had earlier been reported.

What Ryan Braun did was to get himself a good lawyer.  The validity of the test was never questioned.  He was able to convince a panel of arbitrators on a split decision that a technicality of a technicality voided the whole process.

Baseball certainly needs to clarify the rules for handling samples and indeed for taking them in the future.  Fans can conclude two things from the entire affair.  One is that if you are a big star nothing bad will happen to you, at least until your career is over.  The other thing is that, if the results are correct, Ryan Braun must be incredibly stupid or arrogant to have been taking illegal substances during the season, which is the only time baseball runs random tests.

This policy, by the way, is another reason to conclude baseball is not serious about enforcing doping rules, since in all other sports it has been found that athletes are more likely to use banned substances in off-season training to bulk up or when injured to speed healing.

Top Prospects

Baseball America and Baseball Prospectus came out with their Top 100 Prospects lists today.  No real surprises.  The Cubs have four prospects on the BA list: Brett Jackson at #32, Anthony Rizzo at #47, Javier Baez at #51, and Matt Szczur at #64. BP has the same players as BA, but the rankings are lower and Szczur is not on it.

That's about average performance for a big league franchise.  There are 32 teams, so having three ranked prospects would be average.  Two things are disturbing for Cubs fans if these ratings carry any weight in the real world.  One is that they have no one in the top ten or top twenty.  The other is there are no pitchers among their ranked players.

The Cubs used to be famous for developing pitchers and little else from their farm system and this was regarded as a strength.  One sure and cheap way to build from within is to develop top notch pitchers from your farm system.  The Cubs have not been doing this lately and it has shown on the field.  Conception might make this list down the road, but there isn't a whole lot else out there.

I rather look for Epstein and Hoyer to be drafting college pitchers hard in this year's amateur draft.

Quick Hits

The Cubs settled their arbitration with Matt Garza for a little less than half the difference.  Most commentators seem to think that means the team is still shopping a guy who, though not a genuine ace, is arguably the only very good starting pitcher they have.  I rather think the opposite is the case, simply because if they were really determined to trade him, they would have let the case go to arbitration.  They would surely have won the award at their number, as Garza's number was just off the wall.

You have to wonder what Garza's connections are really up to.  From their actions, one would suppose the two sides are amenable to an extension but pretty far away on price.  I still think an extension is possible this year, but I also think Garza is gambling on having a really breakout year that is going to put him up in the $15MM range when he hits free agency.  Clearly the Cubs think he is dreaming here, but they are in a good position with him.  Should they contend this season, they can keep him in the knowledge he is under team control for another year.  Should they flop, they are likely to be able to move him at the deadline for a good deal more than they are likely to get now.

The Cubs have designated Blake DeWitt for assignment in order to clear a roster space for Adrian Cardenas, a AAA second baseman/utility infielder they have claimed on waivers from the Oakland system.  This is a smart move.  DeWitt has never lived up to his promise and was a rather superfluous addition to the team once they acquired Ian Stewart from the Rockies to play third base.  I had thought they might get something for DeWitt, and maybe they still will.

Cardenas is four years younger, a good deal more versatile, and looks like a reasonably patient left-handed hitting prospect.  He was once rated among the top ten A's prospects, but the organization seems to have given up on him.

Quick Thoughts on the Latest Trade

First off, Epstein and Hoyer must really like Anthony Rizzo.  He has been a key player now involved in two big trades, the first being the acquisition of Adrian Gonzalez by the Red Sox when Epstein was GM there and Hoyer the GM in San Diego.  Now, essentially they have got him back in exchange for Andrew Cashner.

Rizzo is only 22 and has terrific numbers in the minors.  He was clearly over-matched last year when the Padres brought him up.  He batted like .140 and struck out nearly half the time, 46Ks in 128 ABs.  On the other hand he walked 31 times.  This kid has potential and the Cubs must think he was genuinely over-matched as they intend to start him out at AAA.  I could be wrong, but LaHair still may have a future even if he is displaced by Rizzo.  He played reasonably well in the outfield last season, at least as well defensively as Soriano did in LF.

Weighing against the Epstein/Hoyer assessment of Rizzo is the fact that the Padres clearly have given up on him, choosing instead to trade for the major league ready Yonder Alonso, who really can hit major league pitching right now.

This trade makes sense only if you regard Rizzo as potentially a franchise player and Cashner's role as limited to relief.  If you think Cashner is a potential starter, then you are giving up a commodity the Cubs can ill afford to squander.  That may be the case with Cashner.  San Diego intends to use him in the bullpen and pitchers with shoulder problems who throw 95+ usually don't come back and give you 200 innings.  In this matter, things could go either way and you have to trust the GM's judgment.

One refreshing aspect of the trade is that we do not have to endure another Moneyball explanation of the number of years we will control an unproved currently mediocre player as opposed to the older proven player we have given up on and would get nothing for if we allowed him to finish his contract, etc.

Whatever you think of the Zambrano deal, the explanation for paying him $18M to play for someone else in return for a pitcher who, whatever his potential, genuinely stinks right now makes absolutely no sense.

First Reactions to Zambrano Trade

My first reaction here is that I don't much like it at all.  Everyone who reads this blog knows that I think Carlos Zambrano is a good pitcher who is still young enough to regain his best form.  Moreover, whatever you may think of Zambrano personally, you have to agree that he is an exciting player and also that the Cubs have just completely mismanaged his career.

I suppose it was inevitable given the whole mess that ended last season that the Cubs would be looking for a face-saving way out of the situation.  Here's the thing, however, the Cubs deal off Zambrano in his contract year and agree to pay another team something like $15M of his $18M contract.  Moreover, he is going to a team that is making a big play to contend in the NL East and for a manager who is a close friend.  He's likely to do well there, maybe better than he might have done here with all the baggage and tension surrounding his return.

In return, the Cubs get what?  Chris Volstad, a young and inconsistent former #1 draft pick who just seems to manufacture base runners and home runs.  He has been in the majors for four seasons and has got worse in each of them.  When I first heard of the deal, although I didn't like it, I thought, well, at least they got a young ML starter in return.  Then I did some research.  Boy, does this guy stink!  Take a look at this article in which pitchers stuff is rated statistically.  Turns out Volstad works out over the past three seasons as having the eighth worst stuff in all of baseball.  Some catch.

I might be wrong here, and maybe someone can turn him around, but this move smacks of desperation.  Even at his worst and most distracting, Zambrano was good for 9 or 10 wins in partial seasons interrupted by all sorts of trips to the DL and suspensions.  Even in the last three seasons when Zambrano was not as effective and seemingly more troubled than earlier in his career, and even though his team was just awful, the Cubs had a won/lost record well over .500 when he started.  With Volstad on the hill, the opposite was the case.

Looking at the Marshall Trade

Theo Epstein on more than one occasion referred to Sean Marshall as the best left-handed reliever in baseball.  Assuming this wasn't just hype, was trading Marshall a good idea?

On the whole, I really liked Marshall as a player.  I'm sorry not to have him - one of the more agreeable Cubs on a team of singularly disagreeable figures - to root for.  I always thought Marshall got short-changed a bit when he wasn't given the chance to start on a consistent basis.  Now that he has established himself as a consistent setup man, it seems he is consigned to that role for the indefinite future.

Given that status, though, it makes sense to consider him an asset of some value who can be exchanged for assets the Cubs as a team do not possess in abundance.  Also, relief pitchers are an odd bunch just because generally they are not good enough or complete enough commodities to produce consistently for many years.  Usually this is because of some defect in their makeup as players or because they have only one or two quality pitches.

Marshall is different in this respect, as he seems to possess three or four quality pitches.  In other words, he has starter stuff if not a starter's mindset.  He'll probably help the Reds significantly this year if they manage to transform themselves into genuine contenders.

The Reds, for their part, seem hellbent on trading away all their promising young players and prospects for a chance to win the division this year and/or next before Joey Votto inevitably departs as a free agent.  They have a point.  Their bet is the Cardinals and Brewers will be significantly weakened by the departure of their superstar first basemen and the Cubs won't be in a position to contend.

On balance, I think the trade will benefit both teams, but the Cubs more both in the short and long term.  Obviously, the immediate need for the Cubs is perceived to be starting pitching.  You can't really argue with that.  Last season turned into a complete disaster when two of their five starters went down in the first week of the year.  They just didn't have the personnel in the minors to even halfway replace them and every effort to go out into the market brought back an even bigger loser than the last.

Travis Wood showed a lot of promise in his rookie year even though he regressed some in 2011.  In a way, he rather resembles Sean Marshall five years ago.  If you look at his numbers, he has a much better record on the road.  This is consistent with him being a fly ball pitcher and Cincinnati's stadium being a home run park.  Of course, when the wind blows out at Wrigley, this is going to give Wood similar problems, but actually the Cubs home field is by no means the homer friendly ballpark it is generally portrayed to be most of the time.

The Cubs did manage to obtain two potentially useful chips as part of the exchange.  Ronald Torreyes has put up Starlin Castro type numbers at A ball and he looks to be a key to this deal.  From what I have read, he is a great raw talent and might be on a fast track to the majors, certainly not this coming year, but probably not long after.  He plays second base.

Dave Sappelt is the other player involved.  He played a bit last year with the Reds, but was not impressive.  He had good numbers in the minors and was thought to be the best hitter in the Reds organization in 2010.  A good defensive outfielder, he looks like a patient hitter, but he doesn't have the power numbers expected of a corner outfielder.  He can play center field, which is a plus, but right now he projects as a fourth or fifth outfielder or a platoon option.  He has stolen a lot of bases in the minors, but he seems to get caught stealing almost as often as he succeeds.

So far I don't have a major quarrel with any of Epstein and Hoyer's moves, however small the steps have been.  And they are quite right to listen to offers on just about everyone on the team.  I do take issue though with the expectation they will trade Garza, as well as the notion they are in a complete rebuilding mode.

I don't think it makes any sense to trade Garza.  I've never thought the Cubs starting pitching was as bad as it looked last year.  You have to remember they have had the dumbest and worst fielding team in baseball for several years running, so pitching stats are not necessarily reliable in evaluating these guys, even the more advanced stats like FIP and xFIP.

That being said, unless you are getting back absolute knockout prospects, you have to look at how you are going to replace a pitcher of Garza's quality given the paucity of genuine talent in the Cubs minor league system.  I'm inclined to think a lot of the Garza talk is designed to force the pitcher's hand into signing an extension now that ties him up for an additional two or three years beyond his free agent year.  Given his performance last year, Garza's numbers are going to look even better after next year even if the Cubs are a mediocre team, if only because they may have several more players who can catch.  That sort of season is likely to push him into big money territory coming into his contract year.

You have only to look at the money being thrown around to pitchers like C.J. Wilson, for example, to see where this is headed.  It makes sense for the Cubs to extend Garza now, which is what I think they will do if he is agreeable.

As for the Cubs rebuilding, if you look at the moves the new regime is making, they are not long-term future-oriented moves at all.  Rather they are near-term or middle-term acquisitions.  All the guys they have obtained are either young major leaguers or major league ready talent with the exception of Torreyes.

So far the Cubs have not made a major move, but I would not discount such an initiative in the near future if they have a chance.  Major market teams with big budget potential do not strip down to near nothing.

I look for the Cubs to start retooling their outfield next.  This is the worst outfield in the major leagues and one of the real sources of their problems.  They can start by dumping Soriano and trading Byrd.

Cubs Top Prospects

 

Recently I saw an article from Baseball Prospectus that has been commented on in other places.  It lists the top twenty minor league prospects in the organization and discusses the top ten in some detail.  All I can say is that if this is the best, we really don’t know the half of what a mess Jim Hendry and company have made of the minor league system.

I want to state right off that, as readers of this blog know, I am an advocate of the Bill James/sabermetric method of evaluating talent.  There are many variants of this school of thought, but one thing they all have in common – and one thing the new leadership of the organization undoubtedly seconds – is that there is nothing more important than not making outs and showing patience and discipline at the plate.  A corollary to this judgment is that it is very hard to teach this skill, especially at the major league level.

Having said that, it is astonishing how many of the higher-rated hitters seem to be entirely lacking in this respect.  Kevin Goldstein, the author, rates only one player, Brett Jackson, as a five-star prospect.  Jackson ought to be playing CF or RF next year, hopefully right out of spring training.

Of the rest, there are seven hitters among them.  Only a few do not have the knock of being overly aggressive, strikes out a lot, swings at everything, out of control, etc., attached to the commentary.  These include Javier Baez (“rarely took pitches—even bad ones—in high school”), Wellington Castillo, Matt Szczur (“has a very poor approach at the plate”), Josh Vitters (“sabotages himself at the plate by swinging at far too many bad pitches”), Jaimer Candelario, Marco Hernandez, and Junior Lake (“a complete mess at the plate with very little discipline”).

This list doesn’t even include former hot prospect Tyler Colvin, whose shortcomings were all too obvious at all levels last season.  The problem with plate discipline is that it is very difficult to teach the higher a player advances in the system and the older he gets.

I’d have to say right now that Castillo, Candelario, and Hernandez are the most likely of this group to have a major league future with the Cubs, as well as, of course, Brett Jackson.  The rest are very unlikely to make the grade here, though Baez may be young enough to be turned around if he is teachable.  Look for many of these names, including Colvin, to turn up as throw-ins or overrated minor leaguers in future deals.

Just as an aside, you have to wonder why the Cubs have retained the highly compensated and highly regarded hitting coach Rudy Jaramillo.  Since their banner year of 2008, when the team scored 855 runs and had an OBP of .354, they have seen a steady decline in performance.

707 runs, .332 OBP in 2009; 685 runs, .320 OBP in 2010; 654 runs, .314 OBP in 2011.  2010 and 2011 were Rudy’s stats.  Not too good, even accounting for the decline in talent and player skills during those years.