Feature photo of Cade Horton by Rich Biesterfeld
Admin’s Note: Pay no attention to the name of the author at the top of this page. Bryan (@cubprospects for those of you on Twitter) crafted up an updated prospect list and asked us at NSB if he could publish it here. We would have been dummies to answer with anything other than a resounding YES. Enjoy. We’re all smarter when we read Bryan’s work.
Hi, I’m Bryan. I’ve been away from writing for a few months now, and while sitting on the sidelines for the 2024 season is still the plan, the excitement of Opening Day led me to the creation of a prospect list. The fine gents here at NSB graciously offered to publish what I put together, which is quite kind.
This list considers only prospects that did not receive an Opening Day Major League assignment. We’re starting at one so you can stop reading wherever your interest in the farm stops, which is different for each fan. As you can probably guess, for me that means mentioning 75 guys. The write ups are not particularly sourced or researched this year; my instincts from 2023 game watching and conversations guided me. Enjoy.
One: Pete Crow-Armstrong
What I most dig: Pete’s energy level raises the bar for the locker room. Whether it’s the unbelievable play in the field, the extra base he steals or a RBI in a big moment, Pete uses his successes to energize his teammates. Any team wants that.
What worries me some: I don’t have deep concerns that September told us anything about Pete’s viability to hit Major League pitching. That said, I do wonder if the runway for him getting to above-average with the bat might be a little longer than with other top prospects, primarily due to a plate approach that can can trend towards swing happy.
Two: Cade Horton
What I most dig: The lack of complacency Horton showed during his dominance in 2023, integrating a good curveball into his arsenal (which for some reason, is rarely discussed in national outlet scouting reports!) and finding a new changeup grip, signals a drive that won’t slow even well-into a big league career. Oh and the ridiculous slider.
What worries me a touch: The fastball shows some relative cut and some solid carry, but does it have quite enough of either one for the pitch to truly be MLB plus?
Three: Owen Caissie
What I most dig: Last year began the process of converting projection into reality, and it went better than expected. Owen tapped into pull-side power, he unlocked newfound athleticism that helped in the field, and he maintained a healthy walk rate against pitchers nearly five years older than him. He is who we thought he was … but that wasn’t some guarantee.
What worries me some: We all know what it is here. Can the strikeouts just get to sub-25% at the big league level? If so, he works unequivocally as a middle of the order hitter. If not, the road gets tougher, and outcomes of part-time player (or even, gasp, bust) exist.
Four: Matt Shaw
What I most dig: Big league pitchers are so good these days, and I think the best true hitters share the trait that they can let the ball travel really deep and still get good wood on it. Matt has that ability in spades. He’s an absolute pest.
What worries me some: I think there’s a real discrepancy between what amount of power fans will expect based on Shaw’s 2023 statistical output versus the reality of how many home runs he’ll run into against MLB pitchers gameplanning against his swing path. I’m going to be watching his GB% closely, both in 2024 and his first few big league seasons.
Five: Kevin Alcántara
What I most dig: Everything about Kevin’s game and his personality hint at the possibility of superstar upside. That’s not to say he reaches the upper bounds of his potential, but that talent, coachability and self-belief won’t hold him back.
What worries me some: Until we have a good sample of upper level performance, I’m going to have some concern that the combination of his lanky build and his two-strike approach will be too easily exploitable against the best pitchers.
Six: Jefferson Rojas
What I most dig: The Cubs keep pushing Rojas — honestly, a little faster than even they are comfortable with — and he continues to answer the call and impact winning on a seemingly everyday basis. He feels like a true shortstop with above-average hit that impacts the ball forcefully enough. We like those prospects.
What worries me some: Did the speed of the 2023 ascent begin to create unfair expectations about the reality of how far his present-day tools can take him? I don’t think we have enough information and sample on Jefferson to be contextualizing the different outcomes his career could take yet.
Seven: Ben Brown
What I most dig: I have very, very high confidence that Brown’s super-firm curveball will work as a Major League offering. Your mileage may vary on just how “unicorn” of an offering it is — it’ll just get bucketed in with sliders that bear some resemblance rather than what it really is — but the hitter’s swings tell you it works.
What worries me some: The reality of Brown and the Cubs 2023 season is that his “reliever risk” jumped significantly in the last year. That’s not necessarily a bad thing — I could see him pitching eighth innings as early as THIS October — but it impacts how high he can rank as a prospect.
Eight: James Triantos
What I most dig: The combination of hand-eye coordination and bat speed are special. No reason to think he can’t be in the upper half quartile of contact rate in MLB for a decade when he’s ready.
What worries me some: Does the lack of projection in the body limit his upside too significantly? I’m right on the fence there, and the answer really, really matters.
Nine: Moises Ballesteros
What I most dig: It’s kind of hard to overstate how natural a hitter Ballesteros is. He sees the ball so well, trusts his eyes so implicitly, and out-thinks pitchers so routinely. Paired with a beautiful swing, it’s really something to behold.
What worries me some: If I’m in the camp that his viability as a catcher is near non-existent, I have to really believe in the raw power. And I only kind of believe in the raw power.
Ten: Alexander Canario
What I most dig: I think Canario has a really healthy understanding of how to utilize the power tool he’s been blessed with. He cheats a little on pulling balls in the air, but not so much that he becomes a caricature for pitchers to take advantage of. That’s how it should be done with 65 raw.
What worries me some: As much as Canario became a rallying cry for the frustrated fans in September, the loudest in those groups are people that didn’t watch a guy that wasn’t himself for a large part of his 36-game return to Iowa. How close athletically is 2024 Canario to 2022 Canario? I need to see it.
Eleven: BJ Murray
What I most dig: Because the numbers didn’t change much from the previous year, too little was made of just how much better Murray got at basically everything in 2023. But consider the context, in Double-A, against that weird baseball, and see a guy who improved his body, defense, and launch all in one season.
What worries me some: Sometimes when we see a guy in the minors that we insist is more than the sum of his tools, that guy gets to the Majors and finds that those tools were indeed too fringy to play against the very best. Something besides his batting eye needs to jump out a bit more to instill some confidence that it will work.
Twelve: Drew Gray
What I most dig: Because he was being protected so gently by the Cubs careful development approach, it was easy to miss that Gray looked like he was turning a corner at the end of the 2023 season. It appeared to me just on video that he was able to add some supination and found a new layer of command from doing that. Because this worked so well for Justin Steele the last few years, this had my attention.
What worries me some: I mean, everything? This is a low-level pitching prospect with a history of arm injury and command troubles. It’s as high risk as it gets. I have no expectations, but it doesn’t mean I can’t have high hopes.
Thirteen: Matt Mervis
What I most dig: The bad debut could have derailed 2023, it could have been a confidence-destroyer that created self-doubt for months that followed. And while I think there was some self-doubt in those last couple MLB weeks, Matt put his hard hat on and hit .284/.393/.523 in the second half (which we have to acknowledge isn’t as other-worldly in the AAA and Iowa offensive environment as it sounds). I do believe that the man can mash.
What worries me some: The reality of big league baseball is you’re not guaranteed second chances. And you don’t really get third ones. I worry the margin for error has become so small that it should impact his prospect status, because I’m sure it does impact his asset value.
Fourteen: Jaxon Wiggins
What I most dig: The Cubs think they got an edge here. They think by pounding the pavement to see Wiggins not in NCAA regular season games, but in exhibitions and side sessions before his injury, they saw a first-round-caliber arm talent that others didn’t scout enough.
What worries me some: That was a big time investment in draft capital in that belief, but is it pushing the boundaries of small sample scouting beyond a rational point?
Fifteen: Brody McCullough
What I most dig: Brody is checking boxes in the following columns: funk, raw stuff, command, endurance. Hitting all those at once isn’t something to take for granted.
What worries me some: Was he just playing against hitters that he was too advanced for? The curveball didn’t work as well in High-A as it did in Myrtle Beach, and I wonder if the whole arsenal might suffer that effect in Double-A. I’ll be watching those first Smokies starts very closely.
Sixteen: Michael Arias
What I most dig: The changeup, the changeup, the changeup. Every scouting report that just references it, maybe flippantly calls it plus, is doing a disservice to a damn weapon. It is one of the top five pitches in the system, and because of his motion and arm angle, it’s a shape that no hitter will ever be familiar (and thus, comfortable) with.
What worries me some: He’s going to be a reliever, and I’m fine with that, but that role demands a level of consistent intent with pitches that Arias didn’t always show last year.
Seventeen: Haydn McGeary
What I most dig AND what worries me some: Had to combine these for Haydn, because there’s some push-and-pull to how much his strength is helpful to the total output. I’m so impressed by what an all-around hitter Haydn is: he goes the other way, he works deep counts, he drives runners in, he does the things that coaches want from their hitters.
But I think the wide scope of his offensive approach comes at the cost of doing the damage he’s going to need to do to get his big league opportunity. He has a lot, a LOT, of power inside his frame and swing. We need to see more of it in games.
Eighteen: Luis Vázquez
What I most dig: I just believe it’s +5 defense at short, in the big leagues, on the low end. With double-digit home run potential. The floor of value created by those facts is absurd for someone that wasn’t a top 50 prospect for most of his career in the system.
What worries me some: I don’t see within the data a reason to believe that Vazquez is ready yet to be a big league hitter. I worry that to get there would take time and a team dedicated to living with 1,000 bad plate appearances before they got to the valuable stuff. And I don’t think that team would ever be the Cubs.
[Note: For me, there’s something of a tier drop here, and so the write-up will go down to a sentence or three. However, I also want to say that it’s so essential that the Cubs find some breakouts from the following 17 players or so in 2024 for this system to be able to stay in the upper half of the league when the top guys graduate.]
Nineteen: Pedro Ramirez
My history of following prospects has taught me to exercise caution with young hitters that succeed via groundballs in A-ball. But Pedro’s skillset is wide enough, and he so seldom seems overmatched, that I match caution with optimism in his case.
Twenty: Josh Rivera
It wasn’t a good pro debut, with very little jumping off the page, but everything I saw on video from college suggests this guy was a fantastic draft pick. If the Cubs start him in Double-A, as it appears they will, that suggests a confidence in his abilities that should give us hope.
Twenty-One: Brennen Davis
The guy that showed up to camp this February, ready to absolutely roll at the start of Cactus League play, was a callback to his former top prospect play. But it’s all going to depend on stringing enough AB’s together in a row to instill confidence in the higher-ups that he deserves that 40-man roster spot.
Twenty-Two: Porter Hodge
I’ve said this before, but Hodge is basically the personification of the Craig Breslow pitching department: four seamer that plays as a cutter, pure horizontal sweeper, and now the early signs of a splitter. But Porter needs to show some level of feel, he needs to win more even-count pitches, for the stuff grades to matter.
Twenty-Three: Derniche Valdez
Good mover with pop and projection, we’ll need to see it working on the field more often, but the starter kit is fun.
Twenty-Four: Brandon Birdsell
I don’t get the sense that hitters enjoy facing Birdsell and his weird short-arm delivery at all, but the stuff didn’t quite match its collegiate reputation last year. One of those guys that could blossom into a top 10 prospect in a hurry with a jump in stuff because he’s shown a good ability to execute.
Twenty-Five: Kohl Franklin
Is it always going to feel so close and yet so far? Kohl had some of the best individual innings of any Cubs pitching prospect last year, but implosion seems to wait at every corner. The time has to be now.
Twenty-Six: Angel Cepeda
A mix of good reports, good video and good projection. Tons of risk to the profile, but upside to be a top 5 guy in the system someday.
Twenty-Seven: Zac Leigh
Absolutely owned for a two-month stretch in Double-A — mostly after the ball returned to normal — on the backs of a completely Major League slider. Fastball is right on the border of being good enough, but he does throw it for strikes.
Twenty-Eight: Hunter Bigge
Had the Spring Training look of a guy that has never been better than he is right now. I’m not sure the right secondary to become dominant has been found, but I’ve seen enough good versions to think Major League success can be there if his fastball is indeed a riding 98 now.
Twenty-Nine: Brian Kalmer
Definitely have to be careful in overrating a dominant 32-game debut, but there’s something about the violence he creates in uncoiling through his swing that makes me believe in his 2023 breakout. Excited to learn the other nuances of his game.
Thirty: Will Sanders
Sanders feels like nice balance against some of the Cubs tendencies to overtrust small samples of stuff or overweight the ability of the Pitching Lab to be a magic wand. Here’s a guy that has been better and should have been better than he was last spring, with a body you don’t have to redevelop and at least some history at high-level execution. A less complicated project, I guess I’m saying.
Thirty-One: Cristian Hernández
Did the small things well and the big things badly last year, but I need another year before abandoning hope.
Thirty-Two: Michael Carico
Would fit the system’s needs so well if he can catch and hit high level pitching. Ranking him now is an impossibility, a hedge of the wide variety of outcomes that not just his career, but even just 2024, could present.
Thirty-Three: Fernando Cruz
All we have is an appeal to authority that if the powers-that-be will sign a $4 million check, the recipient must be pretty good. Some elements of the profile trend more towards “solid” than “explosive,” but we have to let the mid-teenage years pass before saying anything that sounds remotely definitive.
Thirty-Four: Pablo Aliendo
I have a ton of respect for the year to year improvement he always shows, but some doubt that any skill has reached Major League quality yet. His value to the system as an upper-level catcher with intrigue is high, so you’ll give him every chance to keep getting better.
Thirty-Five: Nazier Mule
Close your eyes and throw a dart, that’s the only way to rank a guy with tons of ability that hasn’t played in a watchable game for a really long time. One of the players I’m most excited to see video from in 2024.
THE NEXT TWENTY
36. Jonny Long
37. Alexis Hernández
38. Cole Roederer
39. Chase Strumpf
40. Manuel Espinoza
41. Jake Slaughter
42. Chris Paciolla
43. Cam Sanders
44. Nick Hull
45. Ezequiel Pagán
46. Luis Devers
47. Matt Thompson
48. Riley Martin
49. Alfonsin Rosario
50. Frankie Scalzo Jr
51. Koen Moreno
52. Marino Santy
53. Ty Johnson
54. Brett Bateman
55. Luis Rujano
And why not, a 20-man honorable mention, presented alphabetically:
Brad Beesley
Drew Bowser
Jose Escobar
Ludwing Espinoza
Dom Hambley
Darius Hill
Ed Howard
Yander Maria
Luis Martinez-Gomez
Rafael Morel
Connor Noland
Branden Noriega
Jordan Nwogu
Reggie Preciado
Jose Romero
Tyler Schlaffer
Riley Thompson
Carter Trice
Kevin Valdez
Bryce Windham
I continue to be fascinated at how Cubs prospect twitter sees potential in every single MiLB pitcher of any age but Richard Gallardo. Where do you guys disagree with each other?!?!
Oh we disagree with each other plenty. Prior to lists coming out there have been considerable conversations amongst ourselves. It’s a time to challenge each other and if you look back it’s pretty clear we’ve had times where there have been wide separation in prospect assessments in our lists. As the organization has gotten stronger the degrees of separation amongst the top prospects has gotten smaller. But the gist of your point is about Richard Gallardo and I wish I could say that there’s some sort of agenda on our part and he’s secretly really good. The surface level stuff seems fine. He’s young and his velocity is good but that’s where questions start because his stuff doesn’t project well. His slider is probably a pitch that settles in as an average offering that can get whiffs. The fastball has velocity but it doesn’t have good movement. “But he’s young. That can change”. This is where the fact that he’s been in the system for several years comes into play. Gallardo needs significant development if he wants to be a successful starter against more advanced competition. Ultimately I see him as a middle relief pen arm where you’re hoping the fastball takes a step forward and the slider locks in with a slimmed arsenal. And hey that’s valuable if he reaches that. We don’t have an issue with Gallardo. Hopefully he proves to be a huge outlier where something just clicks and he’s a starter or impact pen arm. Javier Assad is a good template for that, but that’s also a lower percentile outcome. And while I believe in our ability to provide a detailed assessment of the Cubs system, our lists don’t have any effect on player development. So let’s just see how it plays out for Gallardo. If he takes those steps forwards then it’s good for the organization!
– I appreciate the response!
– Without looking back at lists I mean disagree more substantially than like…Wicks being 6th vs 8th in the system or Zac Leigh vs Frank Scalzo in the top 30. As far as I can tell there are no major disagreements, no dissenters
– The below surface stuff seems fine too! Not too many pitchers *in MiLB* who both can average 95+ *and* run 7% BB rate throughout the pros *and* have a fully healthy arm *and* move at Gallardo’s pace *and* throw tons of innings
– Beyond the age, smart to go after that strawman though, there are several reasons to bet on continued development. This includes arm health, perpetually climbing velo, perpetually improving secondaries, depth of repertoire (4S, SNK, CV, SL, CH at minimum), the strongest arm in the system, high aptitude, high makeup/compete, high pedigree, and the best control and command in the system.
– Do you guys see Gallardo needing further development as like…unique? How is this different from players you favor? I can promise you your favorite prospects are going to be developing, adapting, and changing well into their ML careers, the entire time even
– Justin Steele (2015 draftee) and Christopher Morel (2015 IFA) are two of the shiny, new stars on the Cubs. What’s the cutoff for how many years a player can develop? Manuel Espinoza, #40 here, has been pitching just as long in the system. #25 Kohl Franklin was drafted in 2018 at 18, just before Gallardo signed as a 16 YO. What even are the rules, really? It suuuuure sounds like this one that got made up specifically for Gallardo, certainly isn’t being applied to anyone else with any seriousness.
– ” We don’t have an issue with Gallardo.” I want to believe this but see the above. Or that every mid-20s reliever (Leigh, Scalzo, Uekert, etc) throwing an inning or two a week in the low minors is a more serious prospect (a prospect at all) with more upside from how you perceive Gallardo (as MR). I see stuff like his age, he is one of two current Cubs MiLB players to reach the upper minors by 20 and lead the post-pandemic field in IP until going down in July, being used *against* him somehow. I see no acknowledgement of any work beyond that it’s not bing bow zoom zow enough to market. Maybe no one has anything too specific with Gallardo, but it seems fair to guess there’s probably a conscious effort to trump up his issues while brushing aside any even more obvious issues more popular (often shinier, newer) players can, do, and/or will have. If there’s no bias then *at best* I’d give that there’s a willingness to be inconsistent with your own logic to play favorites
Gallardo throws harder than most of the pitchers (esp SPs) in the org, throws more innings than them, throws more strikes than them, was a higher rated amateur than them, is bigger, stronger, has more pitches, moves faster…I genuinely have no idea what you guys are even looking for that somehow 26 YO Zac Leigh is the 28th best prospect in this system (I know he made multiple top 30s here) but this guy can’t crack lists 40, 50, 75 names deep.
One of the key factors that I evaluate on pitchers is their ability to generate whiffs and how that arsenal projects. The pitchers you mentioned as our evaluators being higher on generate whiffs at a higher clip.
Gallardo’s fastball has velo and yet it didn’t get whiffs at all like a fastball at that velo should. That’s an enormous red flag. The slider is pretty decent. From what I can tell it is the only pitch in his entire arsenal that grades out as MLB average in stuff+ models.
Gallardo would easily crack a top 75 for me, but I will be as transparent as I can that when I crafted my November rankings I circulated my rankings of pitchers and hitters to individuals in the game. I didn’t have anyone pushing back on the fact that Gallardo was lower. In fact in at least one case it was the opposite. These are individuals who would have seen him in person. So he’s in my Top 50 and in a bucket of players that I can squint and say if something clicks then they can move up a tier.
I’ll avoid taking anything personally. You’re entitled to your opinion but please realize that the entire tone is that “it suuuuuure sounds” we have a vendetta against Richard Gallardo and that couldn’t be further from the truth. Do you realize how killer that would be for the organization for him to unlock something and have it click? Would be massive. I’d be incredibly pumped for that.
NSB doesn’t have a bias against Gallardo. He just doesn’t rank high enough for us. He’s also not on Prospects Live’s. He’s not on Pipeline’s. He’s not on Baseball America’s. And BA is the highest on him. Here’s what they said a couple months ago, “Gallardo reached Double-A Tennessee as a 21-year-old and is advanced for his age with four pitches he can throw for strikes. His sinker has ticked up to 95 mph and both his curveball and slider are potentially average pitches.”
That report calls out exactly what we’ve been talking about. He’s young and has some velo, but he also has two “potentially average” pitches.
Believe in Gallardo. He’s a player you clearly do. I hope he clicks this year and I’ll gladly rank him highly. But until I see him generate whiffs, develop a better fastball shape, or make really positive changes with breaking balls I’m going to rank him lower than players who get more swing and miss and/or have pitches that project better against advanced hitters. Age is great, velo is great. You gotta get swing and miss.
I appreciate the discussion! Really do! I may have to quote parts of this, sorry for the inconvenience:
“Gallardo’s fastball has velo and yet it didn’t get whiffs at all like a fastball at that velo should. That’s an enormous red flag. “//
I charted at least a half dozen games and have him at like a 16% whiff rate on the pitch, nothing to sneeze at, and like a ~30% CSW. Also not for nothing but what a pitch “should” be doing is so new at the ML level that I have trouble putting equal value on MiLB without some solid context/reasoning. You might also also consider that throwing lots of innings younger than everyone else is not exactly the same conditions as throwing a few innings while being older than everyone else, one obviously easier to ramp up and chase whiffs, and that latter group tends to do way better than Gallardo in the Cubs propsectsverse year in and year out. Not to mention whiffs come with velo and stuff, and Gallardo’s consistently improved in those areas since MiLB started back up in 2021.
“These are individuals who would have seen him in person”//
FTR I’ve seen Gallardo in person many times, sat in sections with all the folks, talked, laughed, etc. I’m not making the case that he is a Top prospect right now, but also didn’t pick this guy out of a hat. I’ve seen many players in this org live by this point.
“Do you realize how killer that would be for the organization for him to unlock something and have it click? Would be massive. I’d be incredibly pumped for that.”//
Truly I do, but this doesn’t really cover why the Cubs propsect twitter meta has more or less pretended this guy doesn’t exist the past half decade while propping up every reliever of the week. You know I <3 you guys, probably the only group of people as crazy about Cubs propsecting as me, but the level of inconsistency and willingness to make up rules for him that don't seem to exist for anyone else can seem at least odd in my position. There's *at least* a half dozen pitchers on that list who have been in the org *as long or longer* plus are older *and* worse throughout the minors! Yet Gallardo, at 22, is the guy who is implied to be done developing because reasons.
"Here’s what they said a couple months ago, “Gallardo reached Double-A Tennessee as a 21-year-old and is advanced for his age with four pitches he can throw for strikes. His sinker has ticked up to 95 mph and both his curveball and slider are potentially average pitches.”
That report calls out exactly what we’ve been talking about. He’s young and has some velo, but he also has two “potentially average” pitches."//
You're saying this like it's a bad thing? What's really *truly* negative about this and who is doing so much better in the system *really,* especially among guys who are throwing more than a the occasional low minors inning out of the bullpen? Wicks, Horton, and crickets more or less
"NSB doesn’t have a bias against Gallardo. He just doesn’t rank high enough for us. He’s also not on Prospects Live’s. He’s not on Pipeline’s. He’s not on Baseball America’s."
Tbf those pubs have to cover every org at every level in baseball, and not to mention the strength and veracity of Cubs prospects twitter actually makes you guys pretty influential in their opinions. You guys are Cubs exclusive and both Kohl Franklin and Zac Leigh are consensus or near consensus top 30 prospects here in *2024.* From that perspective, you might see why I'm a little more befuddled and maybe harder on you guys.
Ultimately I'm not asking for this guy to be seen as a *top* prospect here. It's just wild when a list of 75 players comes out, a variety of older more injured players with clearly worse resumes make it, and there's not really a consistent story as to why Gallardo couldn't make the cut or most of the cuts on the site. I do really appreciate that you and Todd acknowledged his existence for your rankings, somewhere in the 40s IIRC, and just hope to see a more consistent approach for everyone in the system. Please don't take this personally as the criticism is towards the wildly inconsistent process!
Jeff I don’t really have the energy to go around and around on this so I’ll say a couple things and leave it at that. You’re entitled to your opinion.
There appear to be some big misnomers here on projecting pitching however.
1) a 16% whiff rate *is* a concern. That’s a concern. There are starters who can succeed with that (Woodruff, Nola) but they have multiple above average and even plus pitches that carry their arsenals. The vast majority of pitchers in that range are middle relievers, which is a perfectly fine outcome for Gallardo, but that’s where I project him. Racking up those whiffs rates in HiA games even for that age isn’t really better. That’s a level where hitters are still very susceptible to higher velo.
B) Having only two “potentially average” offerings isn’t good. When we list out Cubs prospects who have pitches that project for more than that the list isn’t Wicks and Horton, it’s deeper. Even when I’m scouting on the amateur side I’m looking for arms who have at least one carrying pitch. I’m not seeing a single carrying pitch with Gallardo. So that’s why I wonder what he could look like in a MR sinker/slider GB% role. Maybe that stuff plays up and you even get two above-average pitches.
C) now if you want to say there are holes in Stuff+ models, fine, but Jeff that’s with things like changeups/splitters that are heavily reliant on arsenal tunneling (not related to pitch tunneling, rather how a pitch plays off another pitch). And while these are newer on the public side, they aren’t new to teams.
D) I’m not going to go into this in depth, but when I said that I connected with folks who saw him in person, the point of emphasis wasn’t what Gallardo looks like in person.
The point was that some of the feedback was from internal Cubs opinions.
So hey you’re entitled to your opinion, but let me at least assure you that there’s due diligence done in the creation of rankings on the site.
“1) a 16% whiff rate *is* a concern. That’s a concern. There are starters who can succeed with that (Woodruff, Nola) but they have multiple above average and even plus pitches that carry their arsenals. The vast majority of pitchers in that range are middle relievers, which is a perfectly fine outcome for Gallardo, but that’s where I project him. Racking up those whiffs rates in HiA games even for that age isn’t really better. That’s a level where hitters are still very susceptible to higher velo.”
I’m going to cave on this one because K’s are not yet a strength. The CSW suggests Ks will come, as does the perpetually climbing velo and shapes, and ultimately they’re cheaper and easier to pick up than health, command, control, or pedigree. I do also have to wonder, given the repeated demonstrations of double standards for this individual, if everyone is being held to this standard all the time kinda thing. Seems like this guy being younger throwing more innings at higher levels than other Cubs prospects puts him at a disadvantage for stuff like whiff rates compared to older guys shooting to throw a few innings once a week
“B) Having only two “potentially average” offerings isn’t good. When we list out Cubs prospects who have pitches that project for more than that the list isn’t Wicks and Horton, it’s deeper. Even when I’m scouting on the amateur side I’m looking for arms who have at least one carrying pitch. I’m not seeing a single carrying pitch with Gallardo. So that’s why I wonder what he could look like in a MR sinker/slider GB% role. Maybe that stuff plays up and you even get two above-average pitches.”
Carrying pitch is the curve, slider, or even, as the velo continues to climb, the fastball. I’m very high on this system’s pitching, struggle to buy that this system’s so loaded with guys featuring 3 average or better pitches with a starter’s pedigree, durability, command, and control. Like I’m sure Ben Brown would make that list, but really it’s just his curveball and he doesn’t have the command or control (or health) to be a sure long term starter
100% there’s big flaws in the Stuff+ models. Stuff+ carried the Wesneski case last year and we see where we’re at with that. It’s the knock on Wicks and that guy’s a dude. This over reliance on one or two numbers to prospect in the post-pandemic world is a trap that I will continue to avoid. It makes no sense to come back after a pandemic and take an approach that looks at less of huge amount of free info with an emphasis on the latest fad at the ML level applied to MiLB as if it’s tomato/tomahto
While I’m not as sourced and organized as you guys, I talk to people at games too. The org hasn’t pushed Gallardo as they have for nothing!
“So hey you’re entitled to your opinion, but let me at least assure you that there’s due diligence done in the creation of rankings on the site. ”
I have to point out here that, in your original post, you listed his time in the org as a reason he doesn’t get attention here vs my opinion that he should be on a list of 75 (or 40+ for the rest). I pointed out a half dozen names that have been in the org longer with worse packages including at least one firmly a site consensus top 30 in Franklin. I can’t emphasize enough that I respect what you guys do, am glad for the content and site as the internet dies, but *from my perspective* it seems there’s something unsaid given the demonstrated inconsistencies rather than a true sticklertude for the numbers and equal standards. There’s definitely a part of me that appreciates how high a standard you guys hold Gallardo to compared to literally everyone else in the org, maybe says something all it’s own! I appreciate the back and forth!
Do you really have to lower your standards, by subjecting the readers to the ridiculous bias of your chosen T-shirt advertisements. They not only promote divisiveness, but also stupidity.
Aren’t you an ‘educator’?
The Ads are generated on your own browsing history. We have no control of what ads pop up.
We can, however, look at lowering the numbering of ads. Thanks for your comment.
We adjusted our settings this afternoon, so there should be less ads. Hopefully that will help.
I question if Bryan forgot Christian Franklin or if he really does not think he even deserves a mention.
I’d bet very strongly it was just an oversight. Bryan has been a pretty big believer in what Christian Franklin could do.
Last year we had a conversation on Twitter about him so I assumed it was a miss. Just wanted to point out that he was not on the list.