Brett Jackson Makes A List and Other Cubs Minutiae
The rush of major league prospect rankings are about to make their way out and MLB/MILB.com and Jonathon Mayo is the first out of the gate. OF Brett Jackson is the only Cub and is listed as the #46 best prospect in all of baseball. Just traded Cub, Chris Archer, finished one spot below Jackson at #47. You can always view past rankings at Wiklifield, where you can discover such things as Starlin Castro being rated #22 last season. From the video clip on Jackson they had this to say...
"Each tool may not wow you, but he can do a little bit of everything and has the potential to be a 20/20 type player in the future."
In other news, if you care to call it that, the Cubs signed Todd Wellemeyer to an $800K non-guaranteed deal with another $400K in incentives. Hendry must be on a contract quota or something.
In Bruce Levine's weekly chat, he says the Cubs may add a veteran middle infielder with Orlando Cabrera, Julio Lugo and Chirstian Guzman being named. He calls out the two Jackson's (Brett and Jay) as the most likely call-ups in 2011.
I think the Cub Reporter should be politics free.
Build Bridges. Don't anyone dare pull out a trump card.
The Cub offense is in on the con.
1-for-10 so far w/RISP.
swing and a miss.
i'm gonna like...go stand over there. *points*
This is all a long con by Arrieta to lull playoff opponents.
the factual correction on your mistakes on your post that I barely bothered to read the first time because it had nothing to do with anything I wanted to talk about is indeed a sign of my degenerative brain condition. I appreciate the safety tip and will be looking into with extreme urgency now.
it took you 4 posts to get to this?
have you checked the batteries in your carbon monoxide detector?
Fwiw, Billy Hamilton's actual WAR numbers that relate to the ones that I posted for Mike Trout are:
- 2014: 2.5
- 2015: 1.0
- 2016: 2.6
But by all means #crunchsplain on the stupidity of WAR while exaggerating your points. I can't wait to read more.
Thanks for the awesome give and take today and for the 535 words you spilled filling in all the gaps that I woefully neglected. We're all a little wiser and better for it. I look forward to your play-by-play summary later in the comments.
it was about a post comparing players based on WAR...and comparing WAR values of a CF to a slew of other players...a post that you made...and i made a comment...that talked about D weighting of WAR...and comparinging WAR values of a CF to a slew of other players...etc etc...
hell, we didn't even get in deep. i didn't even involve UZR or FIP versions and their strengths/weaknesses...or position mandated "handicapping" in points...etc.
let's not talk about that...cool, fine, awesome. context sucks. san dimas highschool football rules.
Thanks for shining a light on this very important topic and steering it away from the frivolity that was the awesomenes of Mike Trout, but moreso on the foolishness of WAR as a metric to judge the value of center fielders. We're all a little wiser now and your contributions are invaluable to this community and to America's pastime. God Bless!
so...what's chan-yong lim up to these days?
yes, those hamilton WAR numbers are very reasonable. i'm on your side now based on that biting commentary and reasoning of why he's a 3.5-ish WAR player over a 600 PA season.
those numbers are obviously well deserved and worthy of no scrutiny...none at all. no issue.
CF D is rarer than a jon lester pickoff at 2nd...totally irreplaceable...no way in hell there's good D, low/no-hitting CF's in anyone's system that could do what hamilton is doing. guys like this don't exist...you get like, 2-3 at any given time in history.
Please do not discuss War here. I think the Cub Reporter should be politics free.
But yes, whether you support War or Peace...Mike Trout is ridiculously consistent and good.