Albert Almora CubsThe Arizona Fall League is the preeminent prospect league after the regular season, and it was set to be a supreme showcase for the Chicago Cubs, with each of The Big Four – Javier Baez, Kris Bryant, Jorge Soler, and Albert Almora -participating, plus long-awaited pitching prospect Arodys Vizcaino. A long regular season and playoffs took Baez out of the picture, and a continued, protracted recovery from Tommy John (and bone spur) surgery took Vizcaino out.

Still, it was a rich group that the Cubs sent to Arizona this year, and they all performed fairly well. Let’s update where things stand with the eight prospects, whose participation in the league I previewed here.

  • Albert Almora – The Cubs’ top pick in 2012, Almora came into the AFL looking for some extra games and at bats, having lost a handful to various injuries throughout the 2013 campaign. Almora picked up those games (21) and at bats (75), and performed extremely well at the plate in the field. Despite being the second youngest player in the league (just a few days older than the youngest, and playing against relative professional veterans two and three years his senior), Almora hit .307/.342/.480. Despite his youth, starting 2014 at High-A now seems fairly likely.
  • Dallas Beeler – A right-handed starting pitcher, Beeler was a fast-riser in 2011, his first full year after being drafted in 2010 as a Tommy John recoveree. He wasn’t quite as effective in 2012, and he had an injured tendon in his hand this year, which limited him to just nine starts. For Beeler, 24, the AFL was as much about making up some of the lost innings as it was about checking him out before he becomes eligible for the Rule 5 Draft this year. Beeler performed reasonably well in the hitter-friendly league, posting a 2.49 ERA over 21.2 innings (not including his fantastic five inning start in the Championship Game on Saturday). He struck out just nine, however, and walked five. Beeler has always been something of a “pitch to contact” pitcher with a nice sinker, who doesn’t give up homers. The lack of an ability to consistently miss bats, however, limits his upside. Is he a guy you absolutely have to add to the 40-man? I’m not so sure. His style doesn’t project as a quality bullpen stash for a team grabbing him in the Rule 5, and the Cubs do have a fair bit of upper level starting pitching depth of his caliber. I wouldn’t be shocked if he’s added, or if he’s not.
  • Kris Bryant – The Cubs’ top pick in 2013, Bryant tore up the Northwest League and then the Florida State League while playing third base. He continued playing third base in the AFL (making many believe he can stick there, but small sample and all that), and continued mashing. His .364/.457/.727 line was good enough to nab league MVP honors, and he figures to start the 2014 season at AA Tennessee. Maybe someone will finally challenge him.
  • Lendy Castillo – The Cubs’ Rule 5 (and stash) pick for the 2012 season, Castillo – who took Vizcaino’s AFL roster spot – had a forgettable season in 2012 before rebounding somewhat at the lowest levels this year. His AFL performance was mixed, with a 1.79 ERA over 10.1 innings with 7 strikeouts, and … 12 walks. Castillo will be Rule 5 eligible this year, and will almost certainly not be added to the 40-man roster. He wouldn’t seem a legitimate threat to be selected in the Rule 5 Draft, though he does offer velocity.
  • Wes Darvill – Another fill-in (Darvill took Baez’s spot), and another Rule 5-eligible player, Darvill is a utility type who just turned 22 and can play in the middle infield. He’s a light-hitting type (as he further evinced in the AFL, with a .171/.237/.286 line over 11 games), but he walks a bit and doesn’t strike out too much. A future as a bench guy is not out of the question, but I strongly doubt he’s added to the 40-man roster at this point, or selected in the Rule 5 Draft.
  • Matt Loosen – One of the toughest decisions ahead of the Rule 5 Draft. Loosen dominated at the High-A level, but struggled with control when he got a shot at AA. Loosen has always been able to strike guys out, but as he’s climbed the ladder, his walk rate has climbed right along with him. The good news is that Loosen’s worst struggles at AA came early in the year. He was demoted to High-A, where he was fantastic, and then was re-promoted to AA. He pitched better at AA late in the year than he ever had before at the level, but it’s all relative (the ERA was still approaching 5 and the walk rate was not where it needs to be). In the AFL, Loosen put up a 3.29 ERA over 13.2 innings. In true Loosen form, he struck out 14 (awesome) but walked 6 (not so good). Will he be added to the 40-man roster? I doubt this made the decision in either direction. It would be interesting to see what he could do in short bursts out of the bullpen, because he’s obviously got the stuff.
  • Armando Rivero – A signee out of Cuba in the offseason (for a healthy $3.1 million), Rivero got a late start this year, and managed just 30.1 innings. In them, though, he struck out 45 batters across stints at Low-A, High-A, and AA, with his best performances coming later in the year at the higher levels. Rivero got in another 11 innings of work in the AFL, striking out 9 and walking 5. He had a 4.91 ERA. Rivero, 25, will probably start the season at AAA Iowa, though he could in a little more time at AA. He’s on the radar for the bullpen in the bigs at some point in 2014, though.
  • Jorge Soler – Unfortunately, Soler injured his leg in Spring Training (though we didn’t hear about it), and a foul ball off his shin mid-season left him with a stress fracture (that may or may not have been there all year), and his 2013 season was over barely halfway through it. Fortunately, Soler made up some of that time in the AFL, adding 20 games and 85 at bats. In them, he hit .271/.311/.376, and was reportedly not running as well as he did pre-injury. Soler, himself, suggested at least once that he wasn’t quite back to 100% yet, and his coaches suggested that he just needed time to get back into baseball shape. Other scouts said Soler looked huge (in a good way), and their impression of him going forward remained unchanged. He’s a top prospect. It’s conceivable that Soler starts 2014 back at High-A for a little bit, but AA seems more likely.
  • Edwin

    I wouldn’t add Beeler to the 40 man. He allows way too much contact, and against MLB hitters, it won’t end well. If a team wants him for their rule 5, best of luck to them.

    • X The Cubs Fan

      But he’s a groundball pitcher.

      • Edwin

        Even groundball pitchers need strikeouts. Beeler can’t even strikeout AA batters, he’ll struggle even more against MLB batters. Unless his projected GB% in MLB is going to be above 60%, and his control improves to best-in-mlb levels, he has no future.

        • Kyle

          Yeah, IANAscout, but I wasn’t much impressed with what I saw in the AFL championship. His sinker is his only MLB-adequate pitch, and it’s nowhere near good enough to make him a successful one-pitch guy. MLB hitters would hit it hard.

    • jj

      Pitchers like Beeler, and to an extent Hendricks, have to excel each and every year to reach the majors – their lack of ‘stuff’ means they are not allowed the hiccups that other prospects can endure. Beeler’s performance isn’t enought to warrant a 40-man spot, even more since he is unlikely to be selected in the Rule 5 draft (for Brett’s reason).

    • dAn

      Beeler struggled in ’12 in his first extended taste of AA, but had skipped Advanced A ball and only had a handful of starts in full season A ball, so it’s not surprising that he was initially in over his head at the AA level. Beeler was much better at AA this year, after having a chance to catch up with the league.

      He may not strike a ton of guys out, but he’s not just a ground ball guy–he’s an extreme ground ball guy, and he has shown now that his sinker is so good that he can put up good numbers despite low K totals.

      The Cubs seem to like him a lot–not only did they send him to the AFL, but they also included him in the orientation they give in Chicago to their most promising upper-level prospects. I expect them to add him to the roster ahead of the Rule V.

      • Kyle

        You really can’t read too much into sending a pitcher to the AFL. It just means he can work the innings without the team worrying about him being worn out.

  • Blake

    Soler needs to have a huge 2014 season. Hopefully he comes to Spring Training mashing like he did last year.

  • ssckelley

    I think Matt Loosen is gone if the Cubs do not add him to the 40 man roster. I would be surprised if the Cubs did not add him. Slim chance Beeler gets added unless they have a spot open and they have no intentions on using it to acquire a player via rule 5 themselves.

  • The Dude Abides

    What is the status of Arodys Vizcaino and where does he start the season? Is he 100%healthy?

  • Blublud

    Kris Bryant has officially passed Baez as the top prospect in the system. The good thing is it has nothing to do with Baez, who is a monster, but Kris Bryant is the monster among monsters. I’m still a huge Baez fan and he is still my favorite, and I think he will be a star talent but I feel Bryant has the ability to be one of the most feared hitters in the game, if not the most feared.

    I still think Baez should have taken advantage of the AFL.

    • terencemann

      I’d argue that, If Baez is still a shortstop, he’s still more valuable due to positional scarcity. I understand everyone’s excitement about Bryant, though.

      • SH

        Inspires a question from unlikely hypothetical land: if Baez becomes an .825 OPS SS and Bryant a .950 OPS 3B, who would you rather have?

        • ssckelley

          Since the Cubs have Castro at SS I would say the 3rd baseman without a doubt. Look around the league 3rd base is becoming a tough position to fill with a big bat any more and the 3rd base prospects are in high demand.

          • SH

            I’m with you, I think. Even barring the Castro issue, I’d rather have a premier hitter than just a premier hitter *for a shortstop*. Of course WAR is WAR, but if I had to have one or the other I think finding a fine SS to slot at the end of the lineup — and a huge bat in the middle — would be preferable to have a very good SS who still isn’t *quite* your number 3/4 hitter.

            But hey, in unlikely hypothetical land the Cubs end up with both, ::swoon::

          • Blublud

            I agree with this.

          • DocPeterWimsey

            If things go as dreamed (and they probably won’t), then the best solution will be to put Bryant at 3rd and Baez at 2nd, with Castro at SS. Baez could slug enough to put up a high OPS for a middle infielder, and if he can play SS at all, then he probably can play 2B adequately. (Nearly all MLB 2Bmen are former SS, after all.)

            That arrangement could maximize the value of each player.

        • Kyle

          Huh. My first thought was the 3b without a doubt. But when I went and looked, dang. SS offense has completely fallen off a cliff. Last year among qualified SS’s, you had Tulo at .931 and nobody else above .785.

          • ssckelley

            But if Castro returns back to his previous form then that means the Cubs already have an above average offensive SS.

      • The Ghost of Brett Jackson

        Agree, if Baez is being ranked as a SS he is the top prospect. But it is a good argument and situation to be in…..

    • Cedlandrum

      Officially like in your mind, or elsewhere? I still have Baez-1 and Bryant-2 followed by Soler,Almora,Edwards.

    • Kyle

      Baez has done everything Bryant has done, except Baez did it at higher levels while being younger and playing further up the defensive spectrum.

      • Cedlandrum

        Kyle is on the money.

      • Hookers or Cake


  • Randy

    I think Baez gets traded.

    • Jono

      I had a long debate about this last week during lunch with a sox fan and yankees fan. They were saying that the cubs should trade Baez to reduce the risk of uncertainty. kind of like cashing out on his value now incase it falls. But my argument was that we should feel confident enough in his development continuing that the organization should hold on to him. To my two friends, Baez was just a John Doe with value. But to those of us who actually follow his stats, there should be confidence that he continues to gain in value

      It’s like if you analyze a publically traded company trading at $10 and believe its share price should be at $15. So you buy at $10 and put a target price at $14. Then the price rises to $12. Some might argue that the stock should be sold because there’s profit there and they don’t want to risk losing if the price falls. But I would argue that if you still believe the target price to be $14, you should hold on to the stock (ignoring the strategy of selling part of the position. You can’t sell part of Baez) because there’s a sound reason why you think it should be at $15. Now, if the fundementals of that company changes for the worse and you don’t believe it’s worth $15 anymore, you now think it’s worth the current price at $12, then by all means, sell sell sell.

      But right now, Baez’s stock is on the rise and his target price seems to be at least holding steady, if not actually rising. So selling now would not be what I’d do. I’d ride this bull market that is Javier Baez (S&P500 hit 1800 this morning, so I’m kind of in this sort of mood)

      • Jono

        The biggest risk for Baez seems to be his SO%, but that rate has dropped throughout the durations of every level he’s been at. So even his biggest risk has a nice reason to give up optimism

        • hansman

          Ho K rate has not dropped as he has advanced. He has 2 months of a good K rate in the minors and players with his BB/K rate don’t have a historical chance of success.

          It’d be like that stock hitting $12 with the experts saying $14 but the CEO has a terrible drinking problem. Sure the company might succeed and you get $14 or $15 out of it but then someone comes along with a stock that is paying good dividends every quarter and offers a trade.

          • Jono

            I don’t follow your analogy. And maybe I’m wrong about his K% dropping, but I’m pretty sure that’s what it’s done. I’m not saying it’s dropped inter-levels, I’m saying it’s dropped intra-level. I just tried doing a quick search, but all I found were season totals. Those don’t show intra-season stats.

            • SH

              I think Doc posted error bars on this the other day, but I couldn’t tell you on which thread.

              Send out the Docsignal!


              • SH
              • DocPeterWimsey


                • Kyle

                  Money shot

                • Jono

                  Nice graph. Just to be clear, that does show he improved his K% intra-level, right?

                  • DocPeterWimsey

                    April – June are Javier’s A+ stats. June includes a handful of July A+ games, too. July & August are AA, with August getting a small number of September games.

                    So, his K’s rose markedly in his first month (or so) of AA, then dropped back to his A+ levels.

                    Now, how much of this was adjusting to levels, and how much was just month-to-month variation in the schedule, I cannot tell you. When you see error bars distributed like this, however, it’s a sure sign that some other important factor (like, say, the quality of the opposing pitching!) varied from month-to-month. Between switching leagues and “duh, that’s baseball!” that shouldn’t surprise anyone.

                    (One day, I’m actually going to get a lot of these data and see how the rates vary: that is a topic that fascinates me.)

                    Curiously, his walks show a different pattern, with the walk spike coming a month before the K spike:

                    • Jono

                      I think the stats I posted below from a Luke article shows it very clearly.

                    • Jono

                      man, my grammar is just awful. Not even just today, but all the time. gawww

                    • DocPeterWimsey

                      Yeah, Luke’s summary basically covered this. Of course, there are not enough data here to make his idea (where Javier has two slopes, one for A+ and one for AA) much better than just “Javier has a K-rate against average pitching of 27%.”

                      Also, the question comes up as to whether the slope gets pushed up every time Javier goes up a league. That is, he’d go from X->X/Y, then (say) 1.25X->1.25X/Y, etc.

                      Again, we’d need more data. (I take it in nearly all media, although I’d prefer not to use punch cards.)

                    • Jono

                      Good points, bender. Hopefully an extended amount of time at one level (like the majors) will let the slope keep falling. Maybe his limited time at each level, and nit his abilities, has created his k rates floors. Maybe if he had a full year in the majors, he could get that % to 20

            • hansman

              From mid-June through mid-August his K rate sat around 20% but before and after then it was well above 25%.

              I, unfortunately, have spent waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to much time looking at Baez’s game log from this year.

              • Jono

                after august? How big of a sample size is that?

                I’m pretty sure Luke posted stats that showed, in large part, Baez gradually lowered his K% at each level (again, intra-level, not between levels)

                • Cubbie Blues
                  • Jono

                    With no % stat, and just by eyeballing the actual Ks, he seemed to improve his K% throughout his time in Daytona. I really couldn’t even make out K% evolution in Tenn.

                • hansman

                  Ok, I just ran his stats from last year. Apparently he was called up a month later than I remembered.

                  Using a running ~100 PA sample, in AA, Baez was sitting at ~33% from July 31 through August 8.

                  From August 8 until August 29 (90 PA) his K rate trended down and his AA season average hit 27.3%. From August 30 until September 9 (which is 40 PA (or the smallest sample size K rate begins to normalize at)) he had a 37.5% K rate.

                  In A+ he did start out high – 28.1% and worked his way down to 20.6%.

                  Wow, digging deeper into these and running a similar model for his BB rates, that sat above 10% the whole time. I must admit, I am highly bullish on Baez right now. He was able to address most of the concerns I had of him back in May and if his talent level truly is that of a guy who can walk 10+% of the time, he is very much worth keeping.

                  If his true talent also includes a 20% K rate, good God, we finally will have a stud from the farm.

                  • Kyle

                    Yup. And keep in mind again: He was the youngest hitter in the Southern League to get 100 PAs there.

                    They could have kept him at an age appropriate level and I imagine the K% would have been quite a bit lower. But they challenged him and he showed signs of adjusting and dominating.

              • King Jeff

                I saw him at the beginning of the year and then again right before he was called up and the difference of his plate approach was fairly easy to notice, even for an amateur like me. He seemed much less jumpy and jittery as the year went on, and laid off a lot of pitches he would have flailed at last year. He is improving, and I think the numbers will start to show that as he moves up.

              • Jono

                Here’s what I was thinking of, thanks to SH for posting the link

                April – 27.7%
                May – 22.2%
                June – 20.0%
                July – 16.7% (3 games)

                July – 33.7%
                August – 24.2%
                September – 37.5% (2 games)”

      • SH

        Although I wonder if he has exceed this FO’s target price. They didn’t draft him, and his approach doesn’t seem to mesh with their modus operandi. Obviously we don’t have that info, but under your (interesting) thought process I think there’s a story to be told that this FO ships him off now while he’s got so much value.

        • Jono

          That’s certainly a possibility. You can have two highly respected investors who have polar opposite views on the same company. One FO might LOVE Baez and project him in the HOF. Tthis FO might think he’s already reached his full potential and cash out on his value

      • ssckelley

        An interesting way to look at prospects. But I have to agree with the Sox and Yankee fan, Baez has reached his peak value in the minor leagues. The only way his value can climb any higher is if he reached the major leagues next year. Players like Soler would be selling low with Almora and Bryant on the way up in value. I think other players the Cubs could “cash out” on would be CJ Edwards and Alcantara, both players are very risky and their values could go either way next year with more to lose than gain.

        • Jono

          I’m not sure “the only way his value can climb any higher is if he reached the major leagues nest year”. His value can climb higher if he rips up AAA even before getting the the majors. That’s at least a possibility.

          But even if that’s true, it doesn’t really concern me. So what if he gets called up and plays well in the bigs? Awesome, right? Sounds good to me. I’m not really seeing how that’s a bad thing. He’d gain value, but still, I wouldn’t want the Cubs to trade him, anyway.

        • DocPeterWimsey

          Historically, I have always wondered what would have happened if the Cub had “sold high” on a lot of their flops. If they had sold high on Patterson, for example, they might have kept Kenny “the O in OBP is not for Zero” Lofton for a year or two while looking for a long-term CFer. If they had traded Choi in the winter of 2003, then they could have signed Jim Thome and probably gotten a good SP in return. Etc., etc.

          However, and this is key, I think that too many FOs have become too stats savvy to really do this anymore. Too many understand the small sample size issues, and how the last half of Year X is a poor predictor of Year X+1. The “hot streaks” (and even standout seasons) that used to fool people aren’t going to fool them as much in the future.

          • ssckelley

            But the Cubs did sell pretty high on Choi when they got Derek Lee in return for him. This is where I hope the Cubs have a strong scouting department so that they can look to capitalize on peak values to acquire talent at the MLB level.

    • Blublud

      I’m not going to speak in exacts and say there it’s 0%, but there is only about a .0000000001% chance Baez is traded this offseason.

      Players like Baez are usually traded by teams who are or think they are a player or 2 from being good and making the playoffs. A proven MLB player is available, and that player has more value then a prospect. The Cubs are not currently in that situation, and Baez is also likely the first player in the wave of prospects that will coming up making his chances of being traded for anything very very slim.

    • AA Correspondent

      I agree.

      The kid has tremendous talent, and I believe he can light up the fastball like an all star.

      But; I believe his value is extremely high and the Cubs could get a King’s ransom for him. A trade to Miami makes a ton of sense to me. Getting him closer to home may be a good thing. I understand that while in Daytona, he commuted home to Jacksonville nightly and he already had a family “entourage” at AA.

      I’d be happy keeping him, but I honestly think that the Cubs should be actively listening to offers for him…..they just may be too good to pass up. His value is pretty darn high right now.

      • Blublud

        You do realize Miami is not particularly close to Jacksonville. I mean I guess 5 hrs is relatively close. 😀

  • mjhurdle

    Players like Baez are usually traded by teams that feel the trade return is more valuable than the player.
    Without knowing what the Cubs front office thinks of Baez’s future, it is impossible to say what the likelihood of him getting traded is. Regardless of whether the Cubs think they are a player or two away, if they feel Baez’s value has peaked, and they can get a good return for someone they don’t project to be a star player, then they are going to trade him.
    I personally wouldn’t be surprised if they trade him, or if they keep him. There are good arguments to be made on both sides.

    • mjhurdle

      Whoops, this was supposed to be a reply to BluBlud

  • The Ghost of Brett Jackson

    I think the more important thing is his BB rate has increased at each level. This is showing that he is developing more pitch recognition or at the very least understanding when pitchers are trying to pitch around him.

    • Blublud

      I think the problem with his walk rate is the same thing people said would happen with Almora, but refused to apply to Baez. Baez was not being challenge at the lower levels and didn’t need to walk. Also, he was seeing a lot of strikes.

      Also, I don’t know if is a good thing or a bad thing, I don’t think Baez’ pitches recognition is all that bad or as bad as people say, I just think he has bad contact skills or it takes him a while to adjust to the velocity at different levels. I willing to bet if someone can find the stats, he probably SO swinging at just as many balls in the zone as out. I’d also bet that on most of those SO he was out in front of the pitch. This would also explain why after a period he can make the adnustment and his K rate starts falling at each level.

      • DocPeterWimsey

        Well, there is a simple reason to refuse to apply the same model to both batters: we can quite emphatically reject it. If your idea was correct, then the K-rates for the two players would be the same at the same age and level. However, looking at their A-level stats at age 19, it’s not even close:

        Now, the walk rates are not significantly different:

        However, combine these two patterns, and you are clearly dealing with different processes. Almora’s combination reflects a guy who swings at pitches he can put into play AND who has such a big red zone that he does it quickly in a PA. Baez’s combination reflects a guy who swings at a lot of pitches outside of his red zone.

        • jt

          even I could understand that

  • Blublud

    MJ, please tell me the last time a team that was not in contention, or that was trying to contend traded the top prospect, or even top 2 or 3. Teams don’t trade guys like Baez unless the are looking for a proven vet and or a yound MLB star. And its not just Baez, that also goes for Bryant, Almora and all the other guys at the top for us. Yes SD traded Rizzo, but that had to do with the FO connections, and those types of trades are very rare. Yes KC traded Myers, but they were trying to compete. I can’t even think of any other recent examples. I dont think the Cubs are in need of proven Vets via trade right now. They can sign those players for cash only. So unless Trout, Harper, Darvish, Kershaw, Puig, Fernandez, Stanton, Myers or a young player who is a star becomes available, I don’t see the Cubs trading any of the top prospects right now.

    • mjhurdle

      Myers is the perfect example of a team trading away a top prospect. KC wasn’t one or two players away.
      In the end, i think we are arguing semantics. Every team is trying to “compete” either in the short or long term.
      And if the team feels that they can get more value from trading a player than they expect that player to provide themselves, then they will trade him.
      I know the return for Baez would have to be sky-high.
      But because none of us know how the Front Office values Baez, no one can say whether he will or won’t be traded.
      If the FO is worried about his K rate, and they get a crazy good offer, then Baez is history.
      If the FO loves the power and potential that Baez offers, then it is unlikely that anyone will offer enough value to pry him away.
      I could see either scenario happening, and we probably won’t know for sure what the Front Office thinks until he is either traded, or starting in Chicago.

      • Kyle

        Kansas City won 86 games and had the 6th-best Pythagorean record in the American League. It’s easy to smirk at them, but there was nothing wrong with them going for it last year.

        • mjhurdle

          Im not saying it was a bad choice by KC.
          I was simply addressing Blublud’s point “Players like Baez are usually traded by teams who are or think they are a player or 2 from being good and making the playoffs.”
          Looking at the 2012 Royals, I don’t think many people thought “If they just got one more TOR type pitcher, they are a World Series favorite”, much like people thought about the Rangers when they went after Darvish.
          The Royals were trying to compete, and they thought that their team + Sheilds was better than Their team + Myers.
          Im not judging whether that was right or not, just using it to say that most teams, including the Cubs, think along the same lines.
          If someone offers a trade for Baez, the Cubs will consider whether their team + Baez is better than their team + whatever is offered. And the value they have for Baez will determine whether they trade him or not. Without know what that value is, it is impossible to assign odds to him getting traded.

          • ssckelley

            Bring that KC deal up again the next time someone suggests a Samardzija for Bradley straight up. 😀

      • Blublud

        I mean, if the Angels get a crazy good offer(of course crazy good means different things based on the player), then Mike Trout is gone. That’s not an indictment of the player traded, just that no FO would turn down a deal like that. That’ll be the only way Baez is traded. So unless its for one of or a similar already proven young STAR like i mentioned above, Baez, Soler, Bryant, Almora and Edwards are not going anywhere. Alcantara maybe, though I doubt it either.

  • Jerome Walton

    Why is Dallas Beeler Rule V eligible if he only has four years of minor league experience?