Castro has amassed over 1500 PAs at age 22, and has a .301 BA. None of the players you mention -- and I emphasize that I think highly of these players and will not be surprised if one or more of them end up having a better career -- has done anything like this yet. And none of them have Castro's power potential.

I'm not trying to find comps because that's not going to do mich for us because of Castro's rare skillset (IMO). I'm just pointing out that hovering around league average in hitting value at age 22 is far less rare than what he was doing two years ago and my expectations are no longer putting so much weight on that because he isn't progressing.

EDIT: And yes, this just, like, my opinion, man. I feel discouraged because he has this massive flaw in his game that needs to be addressed to take any real steps forward and not only has he failed to improve there but he is actually getting worse. Until then, any power development is likely to come at the cost of BA and it's not going to add much to his overall value IMO.

I think Templeton is indeed the best comp. Raw hitter who doesn't walk, but decent at making contact, and fast enough to run out a lot of base hits. Kind of a mess on the base paths though. A bit of power. Prone to miscues.

The problem with Templeton was that his approach at the plate left little room for development. He had leg issues but I think if you're drawing 20 walks a year it's hard to make progress.

I will be disappointed, but not surprised, to see Castro follow a similar career path. I think Castro probably has better skills as a hitter than Templeton: he has more power, and he's hitting .300 as a right-handed hitter, so he is probably relying less on his speed. Overall, I think he will be better than Templeton, assuming he stays healthy, but the two careers match pretty closely so far.

Furcal and Renteria, on the other hand, are pretty different as hitters, never having shown Castro's and Templeton's complete disdain for ball four. I would be reasonably satisfied to see Castro develop into a player like one of them. But then again, I am merely "cautiously optimistic" about Castro's prospects.

The big counter example in Castro's favor (who I can think of) is Jose Reyes and his big turnaround started in his age 23 season.

Which involved a big increase in his walk rate. That would be nice to see.

EDIT: And yes, this just, like, my opinion, man. I feel discouraged because he has this massive flaw in his game that needs to be addressed to take any real steps forward and not only has he failed to improve there but he is actually getting worse. Until then, any power development is likely to come at the cost of BA and it's not going to add much to his overall value IMO.

I fully agree about the massive flaw. If it doesn't get better, Garry Templeton will likely be an optimistic projection.

I am more concerned about speed being one of his most important offensive skills. Having speed to turn groundouts into singles and singles into doubles and doubles into triples is great, but only while it lasts, and not on the DL.

i will mention that the defensive improvement could have only happened via work. you don't improve your defense via just athletic improvement

it's possible that castro decided he was going to improve his defense. and bam, defense is better. it's very possible that he turns back to offense and decides its control of the strike zone.

ryan braun did something similar. he focused on his plate discipline and his power suffered but he morphed into a better. once he felt like he had his plate control improved he focused on defense/baserunning.

the really good ones/great ones can do that in a very methodical way. maybe folks get impatient but if you can wait the results can be pretty fun to see

OPS+ through age 22 (far from ideal, but it's quick and dirty):

Renteria: 87
Furcal: 98 (One very impressive season)
Castro: 105

At no point in either of their careers have they had a career OPS+ of 105. They are not comparable to Castro.

On the walk point, SSS, but Castro has more than doubled his walk rate since Jaramillo was let go.

OPS+ through age 22 (far from ideal, but it's quick and dirty):

As I discussed, OPS+ doesn't capture the problem. I agree that his performance so far is an impressive feat: you don't hit .301 over 1500+ PAs as a 20-22 year-old unless you are really, really good at something. The argument is that considering his overall approach at the plate (and it will take more than drawing six walks over 14 games to make me think it was Jaramillo's fault), this does not seem sustainable to me.

I'm curious, how many players in MLB history rose to stardom after around 1600 PAs with a walk rate around 4.8%?

This is something that play-index can do. These are players with at least 1000 PA through the age of 22, with a walk rate under 6%. I did OPS+ cut-offs at 90 and 120. Post-1947 only. First list is shortstops:

105 OPS+, 1600 PA, 4.8% BB/PA - Starlin Castro
---------------------------------
99 OPS+, 1550 PA, 2.9% BB/PA - Garry Templeton
90 OPS+, 2900 PA, 5.2% BB/PA - Robin Yount

Second list is for all positions:

110 OPS+, 1200 PA, 5.8% BB/PA - Carney Lansford
109 OPS+, 1200 PA, 5.6% BB/PA - Paul Molitor
106 OPS+, 1200 PA, 5.5% BB/PA - George Brett
--------------------------------
105 OPS+, 1600 PA, 4.8% BB/PA - Starlin Castro
--------------------------------
105 OPS+, 1050 PA, 6.0% BB/PA - Rod Carew
102 OPS+, 1800 PA, 5.9% BB/PA - Ruben Sierra
99 OPS+, 1250 PA, 4.8% BB/PA - Rocco Baldelli
99 OPS+, 1550 PA, 2.9% BB/PA - Garry Templeton
96 OPS+, 1450 PA, 4.3% BB/PA - Delmon Young
96 OPS+, 1650 PA, 5.3% BB/PA - Ivan Rodriguez
96 OPS+, 1200 PA, 5.4% BB/PA - Jose Cardenal
91 OPS+, 1050 PA, 3.1% BB/PA - Rennie Stennett
90 OPS+, 1600 PA, 4.3% BB/PA - Carl Crawford
90 OPS+, 2900 PA, 5.2% BB/PA - Robin Yount

Short answer - yes, it is actually extremely possible to develop into a Hall of Fame hitter after a thousand or more PA with a poor BB rate through the age of 22. It's also possible to bust. Nothing's a sure thing, but nothing that Castro has done has disqualified him from being compared to some legit HoFers, along with some solid All-Stars, some reasonable MLB contributors, and some busts. None of the busts played SS, though.

Since this is turning into a Castro thread---

I've noticed that since Rowson took over that Castro seems to have altered his approach a bit. I don't know if it's reflected in the numbers yet, but he seems to be swinging at fewer first pitches and seems more willing to take with two strikes. The immediate results have not been good. His average has dropped, and his walk rate has not gone noticeably up, but if he can stay with it, Castro may be able to learn to hit without being so aggressive early in the count.

He's young enough to change if he buys into what Rowson seems to be trying to do and doesn't revert just because his numbers take a temporary dip.

EDIT: Per SSR in post 56, I guess it is starting to be reflected in the numbers.

MCoA: thanks, that's much rosier than I would have guessed.

It's also possible to bust.

I'm not so sure about that. I'm not sure there's a bad player in that bunch.

As I mentioned above, by WAR, Templeton had a 8000 PA career as a league-average SS. That was a bit disappointing given his start but far from a bust.

Baldelli got hurt and sick but still put up a league average OPS+ in 2000+ PA. League average doesn't cut it as a corner OF but that would have played average in CF and above-average at SS. Anyway, we'll never know with Baldelli.

Delmon Young is up to 3300 PA of league-average hitting -- not good for a corner OF but not busty for a SS. Cardenal ended up with 7700 PA of league average.

So really it's only Rennie Stennett and even he hit well enough for a SS (86 OPS+) and he was one of the worst hitters in the list.

Meanwhile, 6 of those guys hit a lot better going forward, 7 if you count Sierra's peak. That said, there seems to be a relationship to walk rate in that list. Among the improves, Crawford (4.3%) is the only guy with a worse walk rate followed by Yount at 5.2%. With our luck, the threshold is right at 5%. :-)

When you are hoping for Alex Rodriguez Ricky Gutierrez sure feels like a bust.

The insane thing about all of this talk is that by the end of the season BRef could very well have him listed as a 6 to 7 WAR player. That's insane.

The insane thing about all of this talk is that by the end of the season BRef could very well have him listed as a 6 to 7 WAR player. That's insane.

Positional adjustment is important, and WAR reflects that. It might overstate his case slightly, but a solid defensive ss that hits even just 5% better than league average and runs well is quite valuable.

The Cubs need to focus on their entire roster. In the grand scheme of things, the difference between a 4 WAR a year prime Castro verse a 6 WAR Castro isn't something to be concerned about: it will play out how it plays out, and then they will act accordingly.

He's an asset either way.

Of course that's just 47 PA against lefties. But the time to find out if he could handle lefties was earlier in the year when the alternative was Baker at 1B. With Rizzo up, it's probably not worth trotting out LaHair in OF against lefties.

LaHair's handling seems consistent with keeping his numbers up to protect his trade value. If he has a nice couple of weeks in July I expect him to be moved. Of course, I can see moving any or all of: Soriano, LaHair, DeJesus, Soto, Barney, Marmol, Camp, Dempster, Garza or any one of the bench guys and it's July 11 with only Byrd having been shipped out - and he was turning into a DFA candidate.

Theo and Hoyer are either going to get really, really busy over the next two and a half weeks or I'm overestimating their desire to auction off the major league team for middling prospects.

The insane thing about all of this talk is that by the end of the season BRef could very well have him listed as a 6 to 7 WAR player. That's insane.

Current WAR(P) totals:

bb-ref: 3.0
fangraphs: 2.0
prospectus: 2.2

nFRAA has Castro's defense as +3.7 runs, as part of that WARP number. That seems a lot more believable to me than the DRS number. Their defensive rating of him goes from -2.0 to 2.8 last year to 3.7 so far this year, so it's still showing progression as he gets better, but the actual numbers seem much more sane than DRS going from -4 to -10 to +15 (in half a season!).

I'm overestimating their desire to auction off the major league team for middling prospects.

There's not necessarily much point in accumulating middling prospects. And of course they will have to field a team in 2013 too.

Obviously they'll move Soriano for almost anything that saves them money. Dempster is likely to go because he'll be an FA but he should bring good return. Garza's an interesting one. The bench guys might get shifted but they won't bring anything back. LaHair would seem to make so much sense for so many contending teams -- Yanks, Indians, Pirates, Tampa, O's, Dodgers, Jays, A's (yes, they're contenders), maybe even the Mets. And he's cheap and more than a rental so he's worth a pick-up even if all it does is improve your chances at a 1-game playoff.

Shoot -- when did the Yanks get 7 ahead?

Well if they traded everyone on the list:

Soriano - giving up two additional uears of control but there is little question they would like to move him.
LaHair - would be giving up lots of cheap control but he's playing out of position in Chicago and may bring actual value in return.
DeJesus - would give up one year of control.
Soto - would give up one year of control (right?) and they actually have other options at C.
Barney - is under control and cheap for a few more years but he's unspecial and the Cubs have some replacement options.
Marmol - FA after 2013. Might be a good idea to wait until after the deadline and test the market. He will clear waivers.
Camp - looks like a free agent after this year.
Dempster - heading to FA.
Garza - one more year of control. The Cubs need to extend him or ship him out soon.

It looks to me like the team would have to piece together a new outfield next season: I think BJ Upton will be a decent value and Campana will probably be a placeholder for Bret Jackson in case he figures things out. Otherwise, the Cubs have other options or the players on the list will be gone very soon. Keeping Barney for long term is sensible. Otherwise I don't think they will miss any one of those guys (OK, maybe LaHair but his low cost and advanced age are worth much more to a cash strapped contender).

To change the subject a little bit: I am kind of curious what the Cubs fan's impression of T Colvin was when he was there. After a promising year admittedly with low walks; he totally sucked last year and was unloaded. He is now hitting quite well in Denver.

Colvin showed flashes, but he wasn't really great at anything. He took a wooden shard from a broken bat in the chest and never seemed the same after that. It's nice that he's hitting well in Colorado, but I still don't think he's a starter on a championship team.

In other words, no big deal that he's gone, but given the performance of Ian Stewart, the trade has to go down on the negative side of the TheoJed ledger.

Per Heyman, Dodgers are the favorite to get Dempster. And also are looking at Garza.

---

I was never a fan of Colvin, but he did have that decent year.

When you are hoping for Alex Rodriguez Ricky Gutierrez sure feels like a bust.

So we're just throwing out comparisons who have nothing in common with Castro beyond playing the same position now?

To change the subject a little bit: I am kind of curious what the Cubs fan's impression of T Colvin was when he was there.

Francouer-rific.

Short answer - yes, it is actually extremely possible to develop into a Hall of Fame hitter after a thousand or more PA with a poor BB rate through the age of 22. It's also possible to bust. Nothing's a sure thing, but nothing that Castro has done has disqualified him from being compared to some legit HoFers, along with some solid All-Stars, some reasonable MLB contributors, and some busts. None of the busts played SS, though.

Even the busts (Baldelli, Young, Stennett) had some value or - Baldelli - excuses.

Stennett's career numbers are great. With his contact skills, the man was a throwback to another era. Too bad he couldn't replicate a few more of the good years.

It's especially frustrating that Soto is having such an awful year (as mentioned upthread, has anyone reminded him that it's an even-numbered year?).

If her were hitting at all, I'd think he'd have a ton of value... if he were closer to his career numbers, what do you think -- say -- the Nats would have given up for him? Average defensive catchers who can post a 105 OPS+ have plenty of value.

I'm perfectly content to have next year's catching corp be Castillo/Clevenger, so I really hope Soto can come alive and draw some interest in a few weeks.

what do you think -- say -- the Nats would have given up for him? Average defensive catchers who can post a 105 OPS+ have plenty of value.

Well, I know that I would be reluctant to give up much. An inconsistent catcher, nearing 30, injury prone, having a second straight down year ... I'd certainly be willing to take a chance for a couple of low-level prospects, but nothing I'd miss.

The Cubs released Mike MacDougal today, so McCoy can rest easy about that.

Off-topic Cubs question: making my first ever trip to Wrigley soon. Any advice on where to sit? Are the bleachers a must? I'll be with my wife, and am willing to pay up to the $40s or so per ticket. Thanks for any suggestions.

The bleachers are a must if you're a fan of sunstroke, poor sightlines, and being surrounded by drunken DePaul students. If your interest lies in actually enjoying the game, the best seats are the upper deck boxes (400 level), particularly between 409 and 431.

Ha, thanks. I'm a huge sunstroke fan but am just meh on those other two things.

Thanks for the advice.

Well, the sunstroke in Chicago is particularly exquisite this summer, truth be told. Upper 90s again today and tomorrow with Floridian humidity.

Any other decent sections under an overhang if I decide to go with a cheaper option?

Well, if you're going cheaper than the 400s, you're pretty much at the mercy of the support beams that can obstruct your view. In that case, though, I'd recommend the Upper Deck Reserved (500 level) in the upper deck over the Terrace Reserved seats in the lower bowl (they're on the 200 level, not to be confused with the Terrace Boxes, which are also on the 200 level but without obstructions and with an attendant higher price). The problem with the Terrace Reserved is that you have both the support beams in your way AND the luxury boxes over you that can really give you a limited vertical sightline (if that makes sense). That really comes into play if you're more than maybe 20 rows up in the 200s, give or take. I probably wouldn't buy anything much further back than that unless I was desperate; the back rows of the 200s are the worst seats in the house, IMO (behind those seats is also where the designated standing room area is).

The 500s, though, are fine except for the odd support beams in your way. If you're more than 3-4 rows up, though, they're generally easy to lean around, and if you're closer to the infield, you'll probably be just fine if you're towards the middle of the row. Also, even though they're the uppermost seats, Wrigley is very small so you're not very far away.

Bottom line is, if you want cheap seats, you run the risk of partially (or worse in some unlucky cases) obstructed views.

So, to sum up:

Terrace Box (200 level, first 10 rows or so) - lower bowl, expensive, not really under the overhang so no obstructed views
Terrace Reserved (also 200 level, behind Terrace Boxes) - lower bowl, structural impediments both in front of you but also above, especially the farther back you are
Upper Deck Box (400 level) - upper deck, however no structural impediments, great seats (arguably the best in the house, depending on personal preferences) but a bit pricey
Upper Deck Reserved (500 level) - uppermost section, vertical support beams here and there, otherwise fine, and cheap

I'd second avoiding the bleachers, unless you and the missus want to relive frat party days...

If you're going to a weekend game, then chances aren't good you'll be able to score <$40 tix unless you chance it and either scalp on the street or maybe visit one of the many ticket resale shops around Wrigley (there are plenty). I got really good lower desk seats a few Saturdays back for about half-face (~$20), but I live near the park and it was a spur of the moment thing for a buddy and I (so we were OK with getting shut out -- figured if we find good seats cheap, we'd go and we did).

Basically, the seating works out like this --

The Club box seats are the first section immediately against the field, separated into "infield" and "outfield" -- you'll pay a premium for these seats, especially on weekends. $60 to $100 depending on the game - even if you buy direct from the Cubs, they have like 5 or 6 "tiers" of games. Since a lot of these are package/season tix holders - it's also one of the better scalping opportunities.

The Field box seats are the next section immediately behind the Club seats - they also come in "infield" and "outfield" varieties. (IF vs OF is basically around short LF/RF). They're not much cheaper than the Club seats. These tend to be either season tix or people who bought well in advance for a specific trip, so sometimes you get lucky with folks who had cancellations, sometimes not.

The Terrace box seats are the sections immediately behind Field box -- also split up by "IF" and "OF". This is where you start to under the overhang/upper deck shadow. If you're looking for $40 or so tix - this is a decent bet. There are a couple levels of games that 'face' for $40 or less, but most games are closer to $50-60. If you're doing stubhub or a ticket broker, this is probably what I'd shoot for.

Terrace Reserved are the back rows on the first deck - you shouldn't have trouble getting $40 or less seats here, either direct or via a broker/scalper. In fact, you SHOULD be able to do closer to $30 for all but Saturdays and marquee matchups (Cardinals, etc). The big problem with these seats is that you can sometimes get bad luck with the upper deck support poles. If you go this route, I'd look for have a park map handy and check the specific section... and I'd actually stay away from aisles, opting for the middle of a section.

The Upper Deck is divided into Box (first section; usually $40 or so) and Reserved (back section; you shouldn't pay more than $20-25).

All sections are numbered, starting from the LF/3B corner around the bowl -- so a Field box in the LF corner is section 101 to 140 in the RF/1B side corner. Field/Club boxes are 100 and lower, Terrace are 200, upper deck box are 400s and upper deck reserved are 500 -- and they all proceed in the same fashion around the park (LF corner around to RF corner).

My preference is usually to sit somewhere midway down the 1B or 3B line - so I usually shoot for sections either in the teens (115-6-7/215-6-7/415-6-7) or around *25/6/7 (125-6-7/225-6-7/425-6-7).

I'd tend to agree with Retro -- the Upper Deck boxes are really good seats if you just want to watch the game. I don't like sitting directly behind home plate because I don't like the angle, so I'd prefer something off-center (I think section 420 is upper deck box section immediately behind homeplate).

Well said, Brian. I think the 400 level seats are the best in the place.

Thanks Retro, Brian, and Zonk- great stuff, I appreciate it. Sounds like the Upper Deck Box are the winners.

EDIT: and Moses

Thanks Moses, too (no more editing posts, apparently?)

Ahh, there it is, just to make me look like a dunce.

Thanks Retro, Brian, and Zonk- great stuff, I appreciate it. Sounds like the Upper Deck Box are the winners.

No problem. You really can't go wrong with the UD Box tickets. The views are unobstructed and close, you're in prime foul ball territory, you can see Lake Michigan if it's not foggy, and the breeze is usually nice up there (rough at times in the early/late season, but vital during this infernal heat we're having this summer). Really the only drawback I can think of is that, if you're in the sections behind home plate, you can't see the press box during the stretch, if you care.

Jayson Stark says the Cubs are trying to move Dempster by the end of the week and that Alfonso Soriano is available.

I'm getting relatively excited about the coming deals --

Increasingly, it sounds like Dempster is probably the best fit on the market for a contender needing a pitcher... Sounds like the Phils want to keep Hamels and the Brewers still don't seem to have figured out whether they want to hang onto Greinke or not.

Should we start taking bets on the return?

I'll kick things off -- I say he goes to Detroit and brings Jacob Turner back....

I wish... although Castellanos may actually be expendable for them with Miggy at third base. Maybe that's something to talk about when Garza gets shopped.

Should we start taking bets on the return?

I'll kick things off -- I say he goes to Detroit and brings Jacob Turner back....

Profar.

I'm getting relatively excited about the coming deals

I was actually getting a bit nervous that Jed Epstein was going to pull a Hendry and do nothing.

Should we start taking bets on the return?

I'll kick things off -- I say he goes to Detroit and brings Jacob Turner back....

Profar.

No, no, no -- I've already got Garza earmarked to go to Texas to bring back Profar (and Martin Perez... maybe engel beltre, too).

Apropos of nothing, Javier Baez is absolutely destroying Midwest League pitching, to the tune of a .975 OPS.

Cubs went out and acquired Justin Germano today for cash from the Red Sox. In turn, they've DFA'd Asencio.

Germano only appeared in 1 game for Boston but has been starting in Pawtucket all season. I wonder if he's being acquired as a rotation candidate for when Dempster and/or Garza are gone?

Germano only appeared in 1 game for Boston but has been starting in Pawtucket all season. I wonder if he's being acquired as a rotation candidate for when Dempster and/or Garza are gone?

Sounds like it to me. It's also being reported that Casey Coleman is going to meet up with the big league club today but hasn't yet been added to the 25 man roster. Sounds like an indication Dempster may be missing today's start.

It kind of sucks if he does, I want him to get the team's scoreless streak record.

Sounds like it to me. It's also being reported that Casey Coleman is going to meet up with the big league club today but hasn't yet been added to the 25 man roster. Sounds like an indication Dempster may be missing today's start.

It kind of sucks if he does, I want him to get the team's scoreless streak record.

Of course, I'd rather not hold my breath that Dempster tweaks something that prevents him from getting moved... For some reason, I've always liked Germano as a flier.

Me too, zonk. I'm scratching my head that the Cubs picked up a guy with a 72/13 K/BB in AAA (though with serious gopheritis) for cash considerations.

He seems a reasonably good bet to have some major league value.

I'm still waiting for them to pick up Sanchez.

In other news Theo has said they won't be going after free agents this offseason since he doesn't believe they are close enough to being good yet to make that move.