My recollection Leash is that Baez was just another of the Cubs can't miss prospects. Yet this new dope has him not even a AAAAer.

_________________

Lol. When I first looked at this, I read it as you saying "My recollection of AA..."

_________________

Baez was always the huge ceiling low floor guy amongst the prospects. Everyone raved at the bat speed and power but pitch recognition was always the big concern. When drafted there were thoughts he'd be too big and not good enough defensively to play short.

Mike could hear 99 fans say Baez has k issues and one crazy fan who says he's a star and hell say "Cub fans everywhere say Baez cant miss!"

He's a good scout/anyst though

What is Julie good at?

yep. the way it has always been here.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

true

_________________

I guess he wasn't part of all the sure thing "waves of talent" that was all the talk.

_________________

They just won the world series meathead, they are young and talented and primed for a repeat..just admit you were wrong and let it go.

_________________

The underlying principal behind an organization having "waves of talent" was that prospects do bust and needing a constant stream for redundancy.

Well, they did win the WS and have the best record in baseball. Isn't it acceptable now to say definitively that the organization has a lot of talent?

_________________

It matters not that they won the WS. My point was how were ALL the prospects talked about 2-3 plus years ago. I went through this with RFDC a while back. I am not talking only about people on this board. I was hearing all over the place particularly the radio about Cubs prospects.

Just face the fact that in general Cub prospects are viewed as prospects and Sox prospects as suspects.

_________________

Maybe partially due to one front office being trusted among the industry and by fans in their evaluation and development ability.

My Exhibit A being that no one was claiming Ryan Flaherty, Jay Jackson and Tyler Colvin were going to be definitive impact players in 2009.

It was unlikely that most Cubs prospects over the last few years were going to bust out, given their universally glowing scouting reports early on, and their constant and notable progression and improvements during their time in the farm system.

In fact, I think most Cubs fans and baseball analysts would admit the Cubs prospects, as a whole, turned out better than expected.

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

Dude, I have been hearing every Cubs prospect is a hall of famer since Tuffy Rhodes and Heep Sop Choy.

_________________

Your two dumb Cubs fan neighbors don't represent the entirety of baseball analysts and baseball fans.

Someone told me "no one buys iPhones anymore" yesterday. I've now accepted that Apple will fold within the month.

You're in a science field, yes? Accept that you do not have enough data to support your hypothesis.

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

Baez was iffy even when they talked about the waves of prospects. He wasn't a theo guy, not a patient hitter, struggled at every level when he moved. He was a prospect but he was never seen in the Bryant vein of can't miss. I'm sure there were some fans who said he was, hell of all the prospects that were coming he was the one I wanted to make it most for some reason but his projections were always iffy. I think you can always look at these players and say "so and so says he's a can't miss" but most of these guys were listed as having too. It was Almora is ready to play defense but he isn't patient at the plate and has limited power and me may never develop either. Soler was a 5 tool player out of Cuba but than it became can he stay healthy, he's got anger issues things like that. Bryant was too tall and stiff to play third (This could still happen) Most every evaluation I saw during the time mentioned that some of these players are likely to flame out. Whether it was Alcantra or Soler or Baez or Almora or whomever. The Braves were often mentioned in how they figured out when their prospects were suspects before the rest of the league and would trade them and how self scouting was important..

And Scott Ruffcorn was Cy Young and Joe Borchard was Micky Mantle.. Whats your point that fans participate in hyperbole?

Yeah, seven games...

_________________

My point is most Sox fans did not super hype this guys from my recollection. I don't remember over the top support for Sox prospects in the early 90's when Blackjack, Frank, Robin, Alvarez, Fernandez et al were in the minors. Certainly the media or sports radio did not. If you can't recall that in any given year from 1984 until the present the Cubs, media or their fans did not have some over inflated hope for some next messiah you have blinders on. Maybe it is my Sox jealousy as no one did it for them or it might be a function of the Cubs needing so much hope for so long?

_________________

There was plenty of talk about Ventura, Thomas and the pitchers in those years. Maybe it was because I was a junky back than but I sure remember them being talked about. I'm not denying that Patterson and Pie were hyped or Choi. But Sports radio and even media (Unless you count the National) was pretty much none existent, unless you went looking for it, back when those sox guys you reference were on the way. You didn't have the Score in 88 when Ventura was drafted. The internet and 2 billion bloggers didn't exist.

And of course the cubs needed to look for something. The product on the field was abysmal many years even with them doing fantastic moves like trading for Rondel White (that's sarcasm). When you are watching the Roosevelt Browns of the world you are going to grasp for something.

Reasonable response Mr. Squirrel.

_________________

It's because I'm sober squirrel at the moment.

Mike just do a search om Baez


312 had him as a bum. I hoped for a 3 year Dan Uggla type run. IMU kept the faith and was mocked.


Anyway, it all worked out. They won the WS. WooHoo!

In fairness to Mike, 312 is an idiot.

_________________

I have thought about that and come to the conclusion that winning in 7 games is actually ideal. You see, the clubs participating each get a bit over a million dollars in profit for each game. Thus, the Cubs got 3, almost 4 million dollars more by winning in 7, than had they swept the Indians. That's money they can use towards payroll. Nobody really remembers or much cares if a team swept, won in 5, 6 or 7. The title is all that matters. As a Cubs fan who loves Baseball, it meant I got to see (and in the case of game 5, go to) more games. So it was kinda ideal all around.

_________________
Go Cubs!!!!

Ideal is a sweep. Dominate your opponent. The Cubs barely squeaked by thanks to an error in game 6, and rain in game 7.

_________________

How many RBI did the rain get in Game 7?

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

Come on Frank. Ideal is winning the world series...in 4 games...in 7 games...in any in between.

And they won game 6 by 6 runs to say they barely squeaked by is not even close

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

Steve took out my pic, which speaks for itself. Fuckin idiot thought I was serious...

_________________

1983 the year before the team of old guys should have put this shit to bed for good in 1984. But they did not. But 2016 is close thought and 2017 awaits all fans of the Chicago Cubs. Sox fans can enjoy the rebuild or whatever you call it. Enjoy your transformation into reality and real baseball. Gonna be a while for ya.