Cubs Prospects Getting a Whole Lot More Data and Other Bullets

old-computerPresident Obama had some remarks about the safety of football, which is important not for any political reasons, but instead because, when the President speaks, people tend to listen. Among his remarks, he said he would have to think long and hard before letting his son, if he had one, play football, and that the NCAA should probably start looking into doing something to protect its players who are seriously injured on the field. He also added this part, which I have to confess, is exactly right for me: “I think that those of us who love the sport are going to have to wrestle with the fact that it will probably change gradually to try to reduce some of the violence. In some cases, that may make it a little bit less exciting, but it will be a whole lot better for the players, and those of us who are fans maybe won’t have to examine our consciences quite as much.” Recently, I have been suffering the cognitive dissonance of loving football, but feeling guilty for, indirectly, contributing to these guys’ long-term health woes.

  • Among the unseen changes of the new front office is the dramatic uptick in the use of data – stats, video, tendencies, spray charts, etc. And that usage isn’t limited to the front office or even the big league club. Indeed, the Cubs make a great deal more information available to their prospects in the minor leagues. From pitching prospect Dallas Beeler, per CSN: “[In 2011], I was in Peoria and Tennessee. We would go into games and look at a guy’s stats and say ‘He’s hitting this [average], or he’s hitting this [average] over the last 10 games, or this many home runs, or had this many stolen bases …. This past year, we’d have a guy – a video guy – who would come and go over [the opposing team's] entire lineup, go through their last 10 games and would find their strengths, their weaknesses, where you should pitch them and in what counts, their stats, if they like steal early, etc. It was a lot more in-depth.” If you’ve got it, why not use it, eh? Obviously, when these guys get to the big leagues, they’re going to be dealing with a deluge of information, so it’s best to get them prepared for it now.
  • Matt Garza is getting close to doing full mound sessions without any restrictions.
  • Dan Vogelbach made’s top 10 first base prospects list, but is all the way down at number eight: “When Vogelbach was an amateur, he created a good amount of buzz with his left-handed power bat. Vogelbach has [not] disappointed as a pro after the Cubs took him in the second round in 2011. He has as much raw pop as anyone in the Minors at this position and can hit the ball out to all fields. Vogelbach has an advanced approach that has allowed him to get on base and hit for average. He was very out of shape in high school, but has worked hard to slim down since signing, something he will have to continue to do as his bat propels him up the organizational ladder.” Shrug. Vogelbach is approaching fringe top 100 overall status, so you’re going to see that most services have him as the third or fourth best first base prospect, but it’s not really something to get riled up about. If he continues to rake this year, and shows some passable defensive chops, he’ll rocket up every list.
  • As discussed a couple weeks ago, the fake-to-third-throw-to-first pickoff move is now officially a balk. The umpires and owners are wholly on board, and some of the players, too. For the most part, though, it sounds like the players wanted to keep the move legal. In the interest of doing whatever possible to speed up the game slightly, I am definitely pleased with the change.
  • Cubs outfield Dave Sappelt got into a bit of a Twitter dust-up last evening after tweeting some unflattering things about women (it scares him to be driven by them (tweet has been deleted), and when they go shopping there’s no stopping them). Not the worst things in the world, but certainly not great things to be tweeting to the world at large. When a number of fans understandably took issue with the tweets, particularly the driving one, Sappelt didn’t really back down, instead claiming that when he said “women driving me scares the dog sh*t out of me,” he actually meant “a women driving me,” referring to his girlfriend. If true, his greatest offense is an abuse of the English language. The thing I hate most about the situation is, at some point, the Cubs might overreact and put the blanket clamps down players tweeting (or, worse, force them to tweet only innocuous, mind-numbingly uninteresting things). Even folks who had an issue with what Sappelt tweeted don’t want that. Instead, players – especially younger players – need to be reminded at every turn that they are public figures, subject to far more scrutiny than they probably expect or think is fair. With instant social media celebrity comes instant social media responsibility. Unfortunately, the latter develops much more slowly than the former. That’s where these guys need a little help from the Cubs.
  • You are informed: Spreadshirt, the company that makes and sells Bleacher Nation apparel (like that beautiful blue shirt to the right), is offering a free shipping deal today through Wednesday, and there’s no minimum purchase. So if you’ve been holding off on getting something, now’s the time to do it and save a little money. Just use the coupon code FREELOVE.
  • If you weren’t around this weekend, there was a ton of new content including a Jed Hoyer radio interview, a Lukewarm Stove, the Carlos Villanueva/Lendy Castillo news, and the possible age-related concerns about a Cuban prospect to which the Cubs have been attached.

Brett Taylor is the editor and lead writer at Bleacher Nation, and can also be found as Bleacher Nation on Twitter and on Facebook.

139 responses to “Cubs Prospects Getting a Whole Lot More Data and Other Bullets”

  1. Joey Jo Jo Junior

    Quick note: I think you meant Vogelbach “has NOT disappointed”

    1. Spriggs

      I was about to say the same thing.

  2. ssckelley

    That third bullet about Vogelbach should read “Vogelbach has not disappointed as a pro”

    1. ssckelley

      oops, someone quicker than I am

  3. ETS

    “Matt Garza is getting close to doing full mound sessions without any restrictions.”
    I just love hearing this. I am really looking forward to seeing how he plays out in ST. I have been of the extend him camp for a while now, but regardless of what happens in the future, I am really looking forward to watching him perform as a Cub while he is here.

  4. Stinky Pete

    I read several responses to the president’s comments on FB and happened to watch “Idiocracy” yesterday. Really struck a chord….

    This is a discussion on the message board.

  5. JulioZuleta

    What I thought was funny was the way Sappelt kept misspelling “sexist.” He kept saying, “I’m not ‘sexiest’” at all. Hey Dave, give yourself some credit, you’re a good looking guy. You’re no David DeJesus, but you’re not “dogsh*t” as you might say.

    1. Stinky Pete

      Wonder if he was channeling Nigel Tufnel?

      1. Chris S

        HA! +1

  6. TonyP

    Thank you for your order! We are happy that you chose to purchase a custom or personalized product from Spreadshirt or one of our Shop Partners!

  7. blublud

    I think people will take more to Vogelbach as he shows he can play first base. I think his bat along would have made him a high first round pick, but his size caused him to slip into the second round. His bat is one of the best in the minors, and I feel confortable saying that even though he is still in the lower levels. There is no way he is only the 8 best hitting first base prospect in baseball.

    1. ssckelley

      I looked through the stats of some of the players listed above Vogelbach and I have to say some are impressive. But if Vogelbach can trim down without it affecting his hitting then he will vault right up that list.

    2. Noah

      The problems with ranking Vogelbach particularly high are: (1) he’s raked, but only up to short season ball; (2) a lot of scouting types think he might be a really awful defensive 1B.

      I think describing Vogelbach as a fringe Top 100 guy is a bit bullish. I think some guys may have him on the outer edge of the Top 100, but a good number (if not a majority) of prospect gurus just won’t list a bat only player that highly until they’re in Double A.

      1. Blublud

        He has already been listed pretty high by a large number of those guys. I agree it’s early. I think he has the best bat in system however. He’s not a 5 tool type like Baez or Almora, but his bat alone is better then theirs IMO.

      2. DocPeterWimsey

        Even if Veogelbach remains an awful 1Bman, he could still be a productive MLBer: if he maintains lines like he had this year, then he will create a lot more runs than he allows.

        I do find it to be a little silly to rank someone so high who has never faced even A+ pitching. Every MLB team has a history of guys who looked very good in low levels, only to be completely flummoxed at higher ones.

        1. Noah

          I agree. If he keeps hitting like he did in rookie ball and short season A Ball, he’ll be a productive MLBer even if he’s a TERRIBLE defensive player. Vogelbach could be the rich man’s Adam Dunn (just as bad defensively, similar power, similar batting eye, better contact skills). But, as you noted, it’s just to early to know if it will translate.

  8. blublud

    *8th Best*

  9. TWC

    I’m hope that the Cubs’ FO doesn’t put the screws to players interacting with others on social media. I, for one, like knowing that Dave Sappelt is a ignorant, sexist douche, and I marvel in his tweet-deleting cowardice. He did the same thing, I understand, when the Cubs signed Hairston: posted a pouty tweet about getting bumped down the depth chart, and eventually deleting it when it stirred up a bunch of crap. I think the guy’s a fool, and I like having that confirmed to the wider world.

    1. TonyP

      He doesn’t come across as the sharpest tool in the shed for sure.

    2. hansman1982

      He also had a pretty pouty tweet when he wasn’t called up after the deadline last year. Katie can attest to that.

  10. ssckelley

    Looking through that MLB top 1st base prospect list and one name that jumps out at me is Darin Ruf. Since he plays left field I wonder if the Cubs have tried to acquire him for Soriano.

    1. yield51

      The Cubs have already had Darin Ruf three times (Jake Fox, Micah Hoffpauir, Bryan LaHair). I don’t think we want him again.

      1. Cedlandrum

        Yeah those guys were never Darin Ruf. Ruf is a really good prospect.

        Darin Ruf—001dar

        Jake Fox was a good hitter, but not the level of Ruf. Fox was a butcher with the glove.—003jac

        Micah Hoffpaur had the one great year at age 28, but was just a decent player before who could field.

        Bryan Lahair was decent prospect at one time but stalled out and then got it going as he was older.

        The three players you listed have some similarities, but are really not the same. You don’t see in Ruf a guy getting stalled at any league. He was a touch mature age wise for AA, but he had a normal progression to get there.

        1. yield51

          Ruf is not a really good prospect. Aside from his cup of coffee (33AB) he will be a 27 year old next summer that has yet to play above AA, If that is the kind of player you want the Cubs to pursue in a Soriano trade, then I’m thankful that you guys have no connections to a MLB front office.

          1. Cedlandrum

            Well I don’t have any connections to the front office so you are safe. However you need to learn about age in prospecting. He will be in his age 26 season this next year. He won’t turn 27 till the very end of July. So he qualifies as a 26 year old this year who has already appeared in the bigs.

            Also he is the 5th ranked 1st baseman for 2013 as a prospect. He is a good prospect.

            Baseball America has him as the 9th best prospect in the Phillies system. Now what I will say about the Phils system is that it isn’t loaded, but there are some nice players there.

            John Sickels who I like has him at 7th. The age thing you site is why he isn’t ranked higher, but you know he wasn’t a great prospect coming out of college but has hit on every level and while you site he hasn’t played above AA except for a cup of coffee, that isn’t a legit argument because the Phils thought him good enough to come and play in the bigs without time in AAA.

            He had a slash of .317/.408/1.028 in his time in AA with 38 hrs. So I think he did pretty well for any age at AA. You don’t see those kind of numbers in AA. AAA yes because of the weird parks and stuff, but that is really very good for AA. His avg. was 3rd I think in AA and his HRs were about 10 more then some really good prospects including Olt and Tavarez.

            Ruf has a chance of being the starter in left field for the Phillies this year or he may spend the year in AAA, either way he wouldn’t be a bad piece to pick up for Soriano, which of course I never addressed the first time. Rather I was trying to make the point that he isn’t necessarily the three you compared him to and a good prospect.

            1. yield51

              You have changed your tune a bit since your first comment. He has gone from a really good prospect to a good prospect.

              Ruf 24 year old season in A+ ops.894
              Fox 24 in AA/AAA ops.842
              Hoff 24 in AA/AAA ops.848
              LaHair 24 in AAA ops.763 previous two years ops .876,.855

              All of them with the same basic defensive skill set. Too big, and slow to play anywhere except LF, or 1B.

              I don’t think my earlier comparison was too far off. Will Ruf turn out to be a good player? Maybe, but I would prefer he prove it another organization.

              1. Cedlandrum

                I haven’t changed my tune. I still think he is a really good prospect. Not great or elite, but a really good prospect. Do you know what that means in my book. It means he has a chance to be an everyday regular. Great would be an all-star. Elite- Superstar. I think he could hit .280 with a .350-.360 Obp with 25 hrs in his peak.

                Also when you say I changed my tune, did you miss the whole section where I drooled over what he did in AA and said it was really very good.

                Here is the thing about prospecting- your comparison may be right in the end, but right now and what we know it isn’t. Those others didn’t do what Ruf did as a prospect and were never really guys that were ever thought of as regulars. Bench guys maybe or a guy for an awful team– see B. Lahair.

      2. ssckelley

        So because other power hitting prospects have not panned out the Cubs should not take a chance on other prospects? I do not ever remember Fox, Hoffpauir, or LaHair showing up on a top 10 prospect lists.

  11. FastBall

    This is ridiculous. This world has become so flipping politically correct it disgusts me.
    I don’t Tweet anything. I have an account. I don’t use it. I say get off this guys back. I could care less what he says or doesn’t say. I am always amazed at how people put their whole flipping life on facebook. If I was Sappelt or any other player or person who might get followed. I would shut the whole thing down and forget it existed. You can’t believe 75% of what you read on there anyway. People spout off before they have facts and most of it is who cares anyway.

    1. ssckelley

      I agree, people are going to have different views on things that not everyone will agree with.

  12. FastBall

    I’m okay with the President having an opinion about football. If he had a son he would think twice about it. I think we all think twice about it if we are parents of children playing sports of any kind. My daughters played soccer and showed horses in 3 day eventing. No there is something you need to think about before letting your kids get started. I rank the dangers in that sport higher than football. 17 Hand Thoroughbreds jumping fences at 3/4 speed is pretty damned risky. Having your daughters get kicked by a horse that size is scarier. I am cool with Obummer saying what he wants about football. I am sick of ESPN playing the news story of his comments 80,000 times yesterday like it was the lead story in all of sports.

    1. Blublud

      I don’t have a problem with what he said either, but I do disagree. I have a 6 yr old who has played flag for 2 years and will play tackle for the first time this year and a 12 yr old who played flag and has played tackle for 6 years. I played through high school. I’ve coached and officiated the sport for several years. I have 2 1st cousin who played in college, another who won his 3rd straight state title for the Northern Guilford Nighthawks here in N.C. and will be on UNC Charlottes first ever team next year and one who played in the NFL. I have absolutely no reservations with my kids playing. You know the dangers. There are 2000 plus active players every single year in the league and because a few who claim they didn’t know that running their bodies at full speed into another human being and crashing to ground was dangerous wants file law suits, we the fans and the majority of the player, who by the way, don’t like all the rule changes, have to suffer. If my kid gets seriously hurt, it would crush the hell out of me, but it’s just something I would have to learn to live with.

  13. Big Joe

    Good for Dave. Many women drivers DO scare the shit out of me, too. No need for an uproar. Women Do shop at will…and are professional about it. Stereotypes exist, because people fit them. Get over yourselves, people.

    1. DocPeterWimsey

      Actually, stereotypes exist because stereotypers are too lazy or too stupid to think, and thus resort to superstititions such as stereotypes.

      1. Stinky Pete

        Guys named Joe are (insert derogatory term here).

        1. DocPeterWimsey

          See, that’s just lazy! Statistically, Joes are just as apt to be as anybody else. In fact, some Joes are just average!


        2. hansman1982

          I am most certainly NOT a Cardinals Fan…TAKE THAT BACK

          1. DarthHater



            1. DarthHater

              The bandana, sunglasses, and fake moustache aren’t fooling anybody… ;-)

              1. hansman1982

                have you ever seen yourself and that guy in the same room together? I think not!

                1. DarthHater


      2. Big Joe

        Stereotypes exist, when a large portion of a particular group of people, fall in line with a common behavior. A person doesn’t have to be “lazy”, “stupid”, or (and you lost me with this one) “superstitious” to recognize common behavior, by like individuals…whether that be persons of the same age group, gender, or ethnic background. Not all stereotypes are negative…but most are view negatively, whether they are practically applied, or not. Some people just need a reason to cry and complain.
        Sorry to blow a hole in your theory, Doc, as I actually put a lot of thinking into my reply. Looks like you need a new stereotype for people like me. I am neither lazy, nor, stupid.

        1. DocPeterWimsey

          Sorry, but I consider anybody who thinks stereotypes to be true to be stupid and/or intellectually lazy. Stereotypes are superstitions and nothing less: I.e., things people believe because they want to pretend that they are true.

          1. Big Joe

            Look up the definition of the word “stereotype”. It’s not an all-encompassing, or defining term. It’s a generalization. It’s an educated opinion, derived after observation.
            Now…stereotypes can be used in a derogatory manner. If a certain stereotype is frowned on, by the group it is associated with, then, yes, it can be used in a hurtful way. That is both unkind, and not right. I agree.
            But, if I see a large percentage of a particular group, do the same thing, day after day…making the same choice, or repeating the same action…and then, come to the conclusion that, “I guess this group of people DOES THIS OR THAT A LOT”…it doesn’t make me a bigot, or a bad person. And, if that behavior happens consistently, and often, I am not “pretending” that anything is true.
            Like Brett said, if you assume that “a large number of”, versus, “all of that group”…then, you are in trouble.
            I really think you’re just wanting to debate, Doc. Perhaps, argue. I’m not into that this morning. I hope your day is a good one.

            1. DarthHater

              “I really think you’re just wanting to debate, Doc. Perhaps, argue. I’m not into that this morning.”

              You were the one who started this line of discussion and, by my count, have contributed 36 lines of text to it, as contrasted with Doc’s 13 lines. But then, if your opinions had any factual basis, this conversation would already be concluded.

              1. Big Joe

                I started nothing. I agreed with Sappelt. I commented on part of the story. I didn’t randomly state that women are poor drivers. Actually, if we’re being honest here, the “conversation” was between Doc, and I. Again, you’re trying to split hairs, and argue. Have a great day.

                1. DarthHater

                  Sorry, pal, but ignorant idiocy posted on a public message board is fair game.

                  1. Big Joe

                    That’s your stance, and you’re welcome to it. I was only pointing out the fact that this “discussion” was between Doc, and I. Your input was both unsolicited, and welcomed at the same time.

          2. mjhurdle

            Stereotypes can be true, or they can be false. The stereotype is not the issue, because it should never be assumed that a stereotype includes everyone.
            If i were to say that women are bad drivers, that may be a false stereotype, but that does not invalidate the idea of a stereotype.
            You could stereotype the group of people that frequent my neighborhood bar as computer professionals that love baseball and college football and are a bit absent-minded. This would be a true stereotype. Doesn’t mean it can’t change, or that anyone that goes to that bar fits that pattern. Just that, at this time, those common traits are shared by the majority of the people that frequent that bar,
            If your issue is with people that believe in false, unsupported stereotypes, then i would agree with you.
            But if your point is to stereotype all people that believe in stereotypes as stupid and/or intellectually lazy, then you lose me at that.

        2. TWC

          ” … I am neither lazy, nor, stupid.”

          Just bigoted, apparently.

          1. Big Joe

            By your definition, I guess I am. No apologies, either.

        3. DarthHater

          Since you are neither lazy nor stupid, I must assume that your views about women drivers are based on a careful statistical analysis of data obtained using accepted social scientific methods. Perhaps you’d like to share the details, so that the rest of us can better benefit from your intelligence and studiousness.

          1. ETS

            I am an actuary who works primarily on auto pricing. You’d think I’d have some profound answer…

          2. Big Joe

            Sarcasm noted. Have a fantastic day. I hope you find someone else, with different views than your own, to argue with.

            1. Stinky Pete

              Maybe when we’re done getting over ourselves….

              1. Big Joe

                I suppose I should correct myself. That statement was for the PC crowd. Now, if that includes yourself, well, then…

    2. TonyP

      Oh Damn

  14. Stinky Pete

    I believe Teddy Roosevelt threatened to shut down football all together if they didn’t make the game safer.

    1. DocPeterWimsey

      He did! I think that as a result, some offensive formations were banned (American football was more like rugby then) and that might have been when some standardization of protective gear appeared. Bully for Teddy!

      1. Stinky Pete

        And there was a good number of folks dying as a result of injuries sustained during football games. I suppose brain injuries are better, buuuuuuuut yeah. I pray everyday my boy runs CC.

    2. hansman1982

      You want to make football safer? Take away facemasks. See how many guys lead with their head then.

      1. Jeremy

        Meh I would rather have face masks when playing haha. I think a really overlooked safety issue is the lack of enforcing mouth guards in football. Enforce mouth guards and it lowers the chance of a player getting a concussion on a big hit. There are some pretty solid articles out there about this. I’m surprised both the NCAA (actually it could be enforced in the NCAA now, not sure) and the NFL haven’t discussed this issue more yet.

      2. Spencer

        I’ve actually been of the opinion lately that the more protection guys have while playing (helmets, face masks, pads for every body part, etc), the more likely it is that injuries will occur because the players feel invincible. How many head-to-head tackles were there when people were wearing leather helmets?

        Also, I see no reason to be concerned about player safety when so many of the players themselves have a wanton disregard for their own well-being.

    3. ETS

      by far my favorite roosevelt

      1. Spriggs

        Roosevelt Taylor is mine.

        1. hansman1982

          Ehhh, I’m partial to Roosevelt Brown.

          1. Spriggs

            The one-time Cubs Roosevelt Brown or the NFL Hall-of-Famer Roosevelt Brown?

            1. hansman1982

              They are so equally awesome, I will go with both…although I have no clue who the NFL’er is.

      2. Spriggs

        Roosevelt Grier was my 2nd favorite Roosevelt. Gary Roosevelt the HS was up there too.

    4. Paul Popovich rules!

      Remember when hockey goalies didn’t wear masks? Back then. men were men! Who needs teeth anyway! Oh sorry, that’s stereotyping. OK, back to Compana!

    5. DarthHater

      I suspect Teddy may have felt that football injuries were a waste of potentially useful soldiers…

  15. Evan

    Jonathan Mayo’s top 10 OF prospects are up now on and Almora is on there. I am surprised that he doesn’t view Soler as a top 10 OF prospect.

    1. Jeremy

      Too small of a sample size right now for Soler. Much more unknown with him than Almora. If he has a big first half and continues where he left off last year, he will skyrocket up lists.

    2. Rich H

      Doesn’t surprise me in the least. Though Soler has a higher upside than Almora. The floor factor in Almora is so much better than Soler. Then you take in the work that Soler has to do to his swing then I would say there is atleast ten better OF prospects right now. Talk to me after this season if Soler takes the next step and Almora doesn’t become more selective then we will have a different conversation. Both prospects are flawed but correctable. That is why we are saying by 2015 the Cubs can be very special.

    3. Blublud

      Which is totally ridiculous. Almora is good, but Soler is a monster. I think Soler’s ceiling and floor are are higher then Almora. That’s not a knock on Almora, that’s just how good Soler is. However, I honestly didn’t think either would crack a top 10 list yet.

    4. Cedlandrum

      I can’t find the link for the OF. Can someone link it here?

      1. North Side Irish
  16. Spencer

    Dave Sappelt is the biggest cry baby on the Chicago Cubs roster. He also has the poorest attitude. He was complaining incessantly on Twitter last year when guys were getting called up from AAA before him. Also, when the Cubs announced the signing of Scott Hairston, he sent out an irritated tweet about it (without directly mentioning names, but it was evident that it was directed at the signing of Hairston), because it knocked him down the depth chart. I wouldn’t bat an eye if the Cubs got rid of him. I don’t want players like that in the club house.

    1. Blublud

      I mean, don’t you want a player who wants to play and gets upset at not receiving an opportunity. I’m not saying Twitter is the proper way to show your disappointments, but I at least understand how he feels. That being said. He appers to still have a roster spot over Campana because he’s a righty. As for the tweets about the girls, can I say overblown.

  17. DarthHater

    Regarding the Sappelt twitter episode, Arguello at Cubs Den writes: “You may remember Ian Stewart had a spat with a follower a while back as well.”

    Hey, Kyle! You’re famous! ;-)

  18. Cubby Mike

    Please refrain for using obama on this site.What he doing to this country is criminal. The only time he doesn’t children to drive a point home, is when he is talking about abortion.

    1. DarthHater

      Please follow your own advice.

    2. bbmoney

      At least Brett only referenced a sports related issue with regards to the president………

    3. BT

      And using “children” as a verb doesn’t help your point.

  19. FastBall

    It’s a 15 yard penalty for not having a mouth guard in highschool football and college I am pretty sure. Not sure about the NFL but it ought to be. You have to be kinda asking for trouble/injury if you don’t use one IMO. None of my kids played any sport without one. Once they get used to it they police themselves on it.

  20. I Used a Friendly Name

    Good for you Big Joe.

    1. DarthHater

      [insert stereotype here] :-D

  21. Bilbo161

    I’m not sure why everyone is so upset about someone who tweets opinions that they disagree with. That is the point of free speech. Stereotypes exist, good ones, bad ones, nice ones and mean ones. What is important is how they are intended. People say what others think of as stupid things sometime, but rarely intending to be hurtful. Social media should not be used by political correctness Gestapo to beat up on people for their opinions. Even the mean ones while I don’t like them, are just their opinions.

  22. Big Joe

    ^^^^ Like

    What you’re forgetting, is that some people aren’t mature enough to grant someone else their opinion. The PC crowd will never get it. They’re too busy trying to change/fix/condemn everyone else, to recognize the fact that we’re all entitled to our own views…free from the obligation of defending ourselves every 10 minutes.

    1. JoeyCollins

      I don’t totally disagree but the problem is the “PC crowd” is also just expressing their opinion. If Sappelt is free to say his GF/all women on twitter are bad drivers, then anyone who disagress has every right to respond. Personally i don’t think it was as big a deal as it was made out to be, but that’s the risk with twitter.

      1. Big Joe

        They have every right to state their opinion. What they have no right to do, is to name call, attack, and vilify anyone who happens to agree with Sappelt. And, as I’ve stated, there is a big difference between stating your opinion, and mandating that everyone agree with you. That is my problem with the PC crowd.

        1. JoeyCollins

          I get what your saying but technically they do. other than rules set forth by Brett or people in a similar position nobody is obligated to be nice on the internet. If I wanted to call Sappelt, or you, or anyone else names on twitter nobody can stop me really. People can block me or stop following me but they can’t stop me from doing it. That being said i can’t stand people who resort to name calling and attacks to win an argument. One of the things i love about this site is how civil it usally is compared to other sites i have visited in the past. But what i would never do is claim someone has no right to be a jackass.

        2. DarthHater

          I really don’t give a rat’s backside whether you think that women are bad drivers or whether you say it from the rooftops. But when you say something that ridiculous while publicly crowing about how intelligent you are and how much careful thought you have given the subject, you’re gonna pay the price, man.

          1. Big Joe

            I never “crowed” about how intelligent I am. I was referred to as “stupid” & “lazy”, for my comments on stereotypes. With your constant need to correct me, and your advice on how I will “pay the price”, you continue to make my point for me. It’s my opinion. It will not change. We don’t agree. Let it go. If you can.

            1. DarthHater

              “It’s my opinion. It will not change” is a defensible argument for statements about subjective value judgments, but not for statements that are empirically refutable. Any auto insurance actuary could show your “opinion” about women drivers to be demonstrably false, so insisting on it as your “opinion” makes about as much sense as if I insisted it was my opinion that babies are brought by the tooth fairy, who gets them from the Easter Bunny. Opinions of that nature are ridiculous – one could even call them stupid and lazy.

              So, I guess we really do disagree. Let it go. If you can.

              1. DocPeterWimsey

                That’s why we robots are better than you meatbags, too…. ;-)

                1. DarthHater

                  Now, if you really want an effective version of the counter-argument:


            2. MichiganGoat

              Last comment, Big Joe are you unable or unwilling to change your opinion when faced with facts that clearly refute you “opinion” then you are basically saying that facts, science, logic, and truth are useless.

    2. DocPeterWimsey

      You are missing the bigger point. A stereotype is not an opinion. Opinions are logical conclusions extrapolated from facts. For example, it is a fact that women are no worse drivers than men based on numerous ways of evaluating how well people drive. (Most people actually suck at driving, but that’s true for men and women: and the issue here is whether women are worse than men because they are women.)

      Your view, i.e., that women are worse drivers than men, is held in either ignorance or defiance of the facts. That disqualifies it from being an opinion and basically renders it a belief. All stereotypes are just that: and thus they do not need to be given the same respect or credence as an opinion. You are not even using the same part of your brain as you would be for a true opinion.

      So, I’m disrespecting your opinion: you have not offered one!

      1. Big Joe

        If a large group of people behave the same way, and are consistent in that behavior, then it is not crazy to view that group in a particular way. Aside from labeling every member of a certain gender, ethnic group, or religion as “part of that group”, it is perfectly reasonable to “generalize” about a group of people. Within respectable context, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.
        So…stereotypes ARE opinions. There are drawn from conclusions, gained from observation. They don’t all have to have a negative connotation. They don’t all have to be ” non PC”.
        We seem to disagree on this. I’m ok with that. Apparently, you are not. I’m done dissecting and analyzing our varying degrees of difference on this issue. This is my last comment.
        I agree with Sappelt. You don’t. End of story.

        1. MichiganGoat

          So are you saying racial stereotyping is a valid and legit reason to attack and insult a group of people? #WeepingGoat

          1. DarthHater

            I only support stereotyping for goats – especially those of the scape- variety. ;-)

            1. MichiganGoat

              That’s a sound opinion ;)

        2. Blublud

          Big Joe, I agree that Sappelt didn’t say anything to outrageous. However, is it ok for me to assume that all white people are serial killers, as statistics show the majority are white. Or is it ok to call all Islamics terrorist. Or is it ok to call all blacks ghetto or loud. Stereotyping is wrong. If one white person is not a serial killer, then the assumption becomes ignorant. People are individuals. If you take ten people alike and 9 people are all consistent and 1 is not, then to view that group in a particular way is crazy.

          1. JoeyCollins

            toatlly agree. The same can be true for sterotypes that are precieved to be positive traits. My freshmen year in high school we got a new kid and he happened to be Asian. They placed him in the College Prep Algebra despite his past grades and insistance that he wasn’t too strong in math. By the time the semester was over he barely squeaked by with a D and all of the material was basically lost on him. Thre problem with stereotypes is that the outliers will get you in trouble. Every Asian person you know may be a math wiz but if you assume that ALL are the same the one who is not is going to suffer.

      2. MichiganGoat

        Exactly! My students always try to argue that they can say anything they want because they have freedom of speech and can’t be punished for calling someone a MFing B–ch. Language matters what we say matters and when we are a public figure we should be hyper aware of what we say. And yes I’m aware that I often throw around and abuse words that insult people but then again I’m a goat what did you expect. ;)

        1. hansman1982

          Comeon, Cubs – DO SOMETHING, lest we each everyone’s arm except for Goat’s then I have to go back 10 years from now and kill him

          1. hansman1982

            eat not each

  23. Stinky Pete

    You just condemned the PC crowd for their opinions. Now they have to defend themselves…again.

  24. Big Joe

    Actually, no. No I didn’t. I pointed out the PC crowd’s insistence on everyone else agreeing with them. That’s not an opinion. That’s is oppression.

  25. mudge

    & then there’s the Grammar Nazi’s is.

    1. Big Joe

      Yep. A type-o. We can’t have that, can we?

      1. DarthHater

        Actually, its typo, not type-o. :-P

        1. Big Joe

          You got me there. I’m sure it was enjoyable.

          1. Tom A.

            Actually I loved the fact that you named a new personaility type — For example we already have Type A and now have Type O — People that always edit what other people say and write. Great creative thought Big Joe !!!

            1. DarthHater

              You should have included a comma between “thought” and “Big Joe.” ;-)

  26. Bilbo161

    Thanks Big Joe.

  27. North Side Irish

    John Sickels released his farm system rankings…Cubs are #10, which is up from #20 last year. Big improvement.

    Cardinals are #1, which is becoming more and more common.

    1. North Side Irish

      I also like seeing the Padres and Red Sox in the Top 10…gives me more hope.

    2. Kyle

      To be honest, with the amount of money and resources we’ve spent the last few years, 10th is pretty meh.

      1. North Side Irish

        Fair point. I was happy to see them move up 10 spots in a year. Plus #10 is about the highest I’ve seen them ranked. I think BA had them #13 and I don’t think BP has released theirs yet.

      2. Marc N

        I think you one said that there might be some inertia in the rankings for the pitching prospects/depth in the system. 10th is just saying “the Cubs are on the short list for 2014′s top system” to me.

    3. Marc N.

      Farm system could be in the top 5 next year pretty easily. With the positional lists that came out these past couple weeks I could not help but notice how shallow and boring the positions get quickly.

      1. Marc N.

        Teams put almost 60 million into the farm over the past two years. At least one person noticed and that someone was Señor Sickels.

  28. Marc N.

    Sappelt should have held his ground. I loathe the offended and their constant nonsense whining.

  29. North Side Irish

    Mayo released the next five OFers on his list and Jorge Soler came in at #11…