Cubs' Talks For Roberts Reach Impasse

“Baseball Prospectus says:
"Veal still has a star-level ceiling as a power left-hander."
Looks like Darkstar is pretty much dead wrong yet again. Veal's ceiling is a mid rotation starter?”

You seem to have left off a tiny bit of that quote:
“---Perfect World Projection---: Veal still has a star-level ceiling as a power left-hander.”

This is the rest of that article: (from Jan2008)
Year In Review: The top prospect going into the year had an inconsistent and highly disappointing season at Double-A.
The Good: Veal's combination of size, velocity, and left-handedness remains a rarity. His fastball sits in the low 90s and can touch 96, while his delivery, which features a twist and a high leg kick, makes the ball hard to pick up out of his hand. His curveball features strong, heavy break, and he has an average changeup.
The Bad: All of Veal's problems revolve around his problems with command and control. His mechanics can get completely out of whack at times, and Veal often showed his frustration on the mound. A small minority believes that Veal would be better off in shorter stints as a reliever.
Perfect World Projection: Veal still has a star-level ceiling as a power left-hander.”

Now, stepping outside that “Prefect World Projection”, we actually see that the site gives this as far as an Equivalent line for his career minor league numbers:

2005 6.62 PERA, 6.46 ERA Low-A
2006 6.70 PERA, 6.34 ERA A-Ball
2006 4.45 PERA, 3.47 ERA High-A
2007 6.76 PERA, 7.09 ERA AA

What they said yesterday:
“After nearly putting up a 5.00 ERA last year at Double-A, Donald Veal needs to throw more strikes and further refine his secondary pitches to avoid a move to the bullpen.”

What they said June 2007:
Donald Veal, Cubs. Veal still has control problems, but the fact that he’s suddenly giving up hits (76 in 75 innings) has his ERA at 5.64 as he’s hasn’t shown the breaking ball that he made such sizable progress with last year. Good news: he had his best start of the year on Wednesday, striking out 11 while giving up just two hits in five innings.

Their page write-ups:

Top Comparables:
Chris Capuano, Matthew Maloney, Tom Gorzelanny, Ed Yarnall, Noah Lowry, Shawn Chacon, Daniel Haigwood, Cedrick Bowers, Alan Embree, Corey Lee, Ryan Karp, Renyel Pinto, Erik Schullstrom, Chris Seelbach, Terrell Wade, Russ Ortiz, Gary Rath, Matt Peterson, Micah Bowie, Brent Billingsley

2008:
That Veal is the best pitching prospect the Cubs have is irrefutable evidence that their farm system is no longer the pitching factory it once was. He failed to take a step forward last year, particularly in terms of his command. The silver lining is that there’s a school of thought that says big lefties develop slowly, with top PECOTA comparable Chris Capuano being one of the better examples

2007”
Veal has the makings of a front-line lefty, but let`s not get too hasty. He`s mostly fastball right now; his changeup is good, his curve not so much, but control is a problem for both pitches. He had to overcome a torn labrum in college, which is another worry point. On the mound, Veal comes out of a high leg kick, making the ball tough to pick up. That`s why he has those exceptionally low BABIPs; other pitchers who hide the ball well, such as Dontrelle Willis, share that trait.

I mean, “All of Veal's problems revolve around his problems with command and control. His mechanics can get completely out of whack at times, and Veal often showed his frustration on the mound.” So, Problems with Control, Command, Consistency in delivery and Mindstate. Doesn’t that pretty much cover everything you can possibly have problems with outside of I guess injuries? Good = Size, velocity & is LH. I fit that myself…

Really, when we step outside of the generic tagline given to basically all Lefties who look like they might fit into the power-leftie category, well we see a guy who is not spoken of as highly as some fans want to believe… Not that he is a bad prospect, but its hard to find anything said really above a 3-type at best unless the report is repeating that stereotypical slotting given to power-lefties…

BTW, MileHigh:
“There's just no talking to Cubs fans. They get something in their head and its a done deal. Since emerging as an everyday player in 2004, Roberts has been terrific. His down year in '06 was due to injury. Do your research before making petty and misinformed comments. I agree that it's too soon to 'tear (Veal) down,' but to claim that he's a top prospect ignores not only his performance- even the best players have an off year here and there and in the minors, you never know what's going on- but his development (or lack thereof). Between the old labrum tear, the disappearance of his curve, and those numbers, you can't just SAY he's a stud prospect and make it so.”

…Well said…

darkstar1661, did you just spend like a half hour copying and pasting crap from that site?

Did you ever consider that maybe the Orioles won't want some essentially worthless pieces like Brian Anderson, Danny Richar and Kyle McCulloch?

I for one am one who thinks Veal will be fine. I would rather give up Ceda than Veal.

Here is an interveiw with him from November 2006. You can learn a lot about him from these types of things.

http://www.projectprospect.com/donnie-veal-interview/

Below is the player journal by Veal in 07...

He is at the bottom and you can see all his postings. Quite a kid.

http://www.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/features/journals/y2007/index.jsp

Adun-

First and foremost, the whole 50 SB thing? That was the point. I was being obstinate for the sake of obstinacy; just making random @ss claims of future performance. It's no more of a stretch for me to say Roberts will steal 50 bases than it is to state, like scribbletone did, that 'no one is going to give more than the Cubs (for Roberts).' In both cases- which was my point- it's just a fan with an agenda declaring that, in the future- surprise!- something will happen to help/validate said agenda.

As far as the second part of your post, it's the same thing. You're talking about making predictions; seeing the future. Who is going to give the O's more than Gallagher, Veal, Cedeno? How the hell should I know? It could be one of a dozen different teams! Trying to guess what's going to happen months from now is INSANE! I'll say this much: In my humble opinion, it wouldn't require much from an interested club like the Rockies or Mariners (just to name the two that popped up in conversation) to trump the Cubs' current offer. That's just my perception (and that of most of my peers). I'm willing to admit I could be wrong. If there were one player on the table right now that I genuinely believed to have star potential, I'd probably say 'screw it, let's take the deal.' But I don't so I can't.

Furthermore, I couldn't disagree more strongly about Roberts. Everything I've read/seen in the national media as it pertains to Roberts has been downright glowing (save for the 'roid stuff- oddly they didn't like that [LOL]) And I HAVE heard rumors of other teams sniffing around him. It's just that it seemed almost CERTAIN he'd be going to the Cubs! I've heard whispers of L.A. (don't know why, but...), Colorado (more than a whisper), Seattle, Cleveland, Chicago (AL) (not that they have ANYTHING to trade)... And that's NOW; a day after a near-certain deal fell through.

'There aren't even other teams talking to them as far as we know right now' AS FAR AS WE KNOW. I don't know about you, but I don't work in a GMs office or any other office having to do with baseball. This site is the closest I get to inside info! Maybe you've got better sources. Furthermore, the baseball world is far from static. I don't think it's anywhere close to a stretch to think that someone else comes along and makes an offer that impresses McPhail (and me) more than the one made by Hendry. And if it doesn't, so be it. Frankly, I'd rather keep Roberts than get less than full value; with the risk (IMHO) so low, I'm cool with taking a stand as a matter of principle. There are so many variables and possibilities that it's foolish to try to predict what WILL or even COULD be. O's fans are willing to wait. Still you begrudge us because we're not caving in, seeing things your way and taking this deal. What's next: reverse psychology? I don't know what to tell you. You can say it a thousand different ways, I'm not going to agree that the O's should take that deal. No amount of spin or polish is going to change my collective impression of the players being offered.

Finally, in terms of the draft pick... Dude, have you seen our team. Roberts or no, we SUCK! I mean WE S-U-C-K. Like, lose 100 games suck. We're going to have an awesome draft pick- maybe No. 1- regardless. Again, it just sounds like you're trying to convince the O's fans that this deal is good for us. Give it up!

'If I were the O's...and I wanted to get something done while still recieving quality, I would ask for:

Gallagher, Veal, Patterson, and Cedeno.

Hendry probably does that deal and it is probably lopsided toward you guys.'

'If you were the O's...' Dude, if you were the O's you'd be asking for the EXACT SAME THING the rest of the O's fans are asking for and not a touch less. Adding another mediocre middle infielder isn't going to cut it. You're confusing quantity with quality (IMHO, I should add).

Mile, I feel your pain and frustration. I can totally understand where you are comming from. The way I started to understand was changing Roberts name out with Ryne Sandberg. I'm not comparing players on a skill level. Just the overall love for the player. I'm not sure you could of pried sandberg from the cubs fan base for the whole 1961 yankees lineup.

So Stewart, Nix and Roe is definately better than Gallagher, Veal, Cedeno and prospect?

And I don't tihnk that the Mariners would be willing to make a deal like that, considering they already have a pretty good leadoff hitter, some asian guy, and they probably aren't interested in selling more of their future.

And I seriously, seriously doubt that the Indians would be interested, considering that they have Asdrubal Cabrera at second already, and Josh Barfield in the minors. Not to mention that they too have a pretty good leadoff hitter, some guy named Sizemore.

Really, the only realistic suitor outside of the Cubs is the Rockies, and unless they offer something like Stewart, Chris Nelson and Roe, I don't see how that offer would be superior to the Cubs' one.

So there really aren't many suitors.

If there were other interested teams, we would know about it. Know why? Don't you think that McPhail would have used it as leverage?? He would be an absolute moron not to. The second he had a call from another team he should have leaked it, making Hendry think he has competition. There are no other suitors right now...at least not that are going to best this offer. Saying there will be is saying that one of the teams competing will have a 2nd basemen get injured for a significant amount of time. I think the O's lose here. That is all my opinion, and I am admitting that Mile...

but to me, the O's are a better team if they had made this trade...and are worse off as an organization for not making it. We will find out though, thats not something we can know for sure right now.

INOK- Interesting comparison on a sentimental level (I like Roberts, but would certainly put Sandberg ahead as a player). Still, I hope you understand that it's not a matter of unwillingness to deal Roberts, but an unwillingness to deal him for anything less than what we (apparently I'm now a part of the O's organization) consider him to be worth. If Colvin were included, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

As I've said before, the Cubs have a very...weird farm system. It's deep and there's certainly talent in places (RP stands out, for instance), but there aren't really a lot of names that jump out at you. Add to that, Hendry's unwillingness to trade any of the guys that DO kind of stand out and it's an almost impossible situation. That isn't to say I blame the Cubs- they're just trying to get their man for what THEY feel he's worth. It's a Catch 22. Were there a few more prospects in that 65-200 range with some upside, it would be easier to work through the problem, but there just aren't those kinds of players in the Cubs' system...at least not in terms of availability. Of Vitters, Thomas, Donaldson, Samardzija, Veal, Soto, Gallagher, Huseby, Ceda, and Colvin...those kids who fit the mold...only Veal and Gallagher were made available. That's not exactly a bevy of choices. Basically Hendry is saying 'You can have Gallagher and Veal or...Veal and Gallagher.' I can't speak for McPhail, but I don't like having the terms of a deal dictated to me when I'm the one holding the money (in this case, Roberts).

Also, adun-

I thought we took care of this the other day. You forgot to call Hendry didn't you? I left a voice mail for McPhail, but he didn't call me back. (LOL)

I am with you on that mile. Roberts is a good player and I wish him the best, and I would love to see him a Cub....just at the right price. At least we can agree on that though, and I appreciate your feedback. Nice to have someone on the other side that can be reasonable, even if we don't agree. We will see who made the better call here. They sent Patterson to the minors today, so looks like Fontenot got the job. Man I don't like that guy...but he did alright at SS...so I think thats why he won it. I just hope they give Patterson a legit chance at 2nd in the near future...

“The fact is that the White Sox would end up offering something like Gavin Floyd, Danny Richar, Lance Broadway and Juan Uribe. I know you never said which players would be involved outside of Richar. I'm saying which players will be involved outside of Richar. And its not gonna be Poreda. Although its true that Kenny Williams is obviously pretty willing to deal prospects for short term solutions, at this point it'd make more sense to trade those guys for a starter, rather than a leadoff guy.”

I agree, but I will never put anything past KW :) If it came down to adding Poreda to a package of something like Floyd/Richar/Low-LvlGuy ~ I think he probably pulls the trigger. I agree about the rotation need the Sox have, but it wouldn’t be the first time they tried to fill that need off the scrap-heap or leftovers pile ~ and he still seems to hold hopes that somehow MarkB/Vasquez/JoseC/Danks is going to be a solid, competitive 1-4. Even a package with Danks or Floyd + Poreda/Richar/??? then sign a Vargas type off the FA scrapheap; the team has their 2B AS and Leadoff hitter with OC moving to the 2 spot and only gave guys with questions or no place to play. Follow it up with Konerko/Thome/Swisher/Fields ~ well, as asinine as it seemed to start the off-season, maybe they could compete for a while… Could they come with an offer like Floyd/Richar/Broadway/Uribe? Yeah, maybe ~ but see KWs “negotiating” tactics and tendencies… Other than the Quentin deal, I’m having a hard time thinking of a deal he has pulled off for something he really wanted without either giving up too much or getting much less than he could have… Whatever, I just see them being a possibility to get it done if they decide Roberts is “the piece” since KW has that illogical stance an all…

And to this:
“And I'm just gonna state once and for all, that I agree that Gallagher, Veal, Cedeno and a low level prospect isn't enough for Roberts. It probably should be, but that wasn't gonna get it done. I was arguing that the fourth prospect would have to be someone far better in order to make this deal happen. Someone like Huseby or Colvin would be ample enough to get the deal done. I personally think that its overpaying, but I don't think a deal gets done without overpaying.”

…That is basically pretty much what everyone on the other side of the fence has been saying. I know I continually said it would probably be Gallagher/Cedeno/Veal/Colvin + a low-minors completely-projectable type (like Huesby) for Roberts+Payton+Paytons-salary if it got done. Payton not needed anymore, and we are saying the same thing. It might be overpaying a tiny bit, but its not vastly overpaying and it seems to be what is needed… Doesn’t hurt 2008, but changes the makeup of the club and greatly increases chances for a 2008/2009 championship.

Mile, I understad the O's are willing to trade Roberts. I was using the Ryno reference to make the point that overpricing Roberts is really not that unreasonable considering the understandable love for the guy.

delaware_bird
"My opinion is that Roberts might be a good steadying influence for the younger players and a familiar face for fans."

Thats a good point. A veteran player of Roberts status and work ethic is a valuable tool to teach younger players how to play the game.

I for one can't wait for those magical words, "Play ball!". Me and you both.

Wouldn't it be great if in three years the O's and Cubs play in the World Series. Cubbies trying to three-peat of course! ;) I guy can dream, cant he?

Scribble- Deal.
Colvin, Gallagher, Veal, and Cedeno is fair and covers value. I pretty much agree with everything in your post.

Buddha- Deal.
I like both your offer and your rationale. Switching things up seems an interesting strategy. Furthermore, I like your line of thinking- guys who seem more likely to help the Cubs in '08 stay put, ceiling guys who can help the O's rebuild pack for Baltimore. That way both sides satisfy particular needs. Great idea. Great Quote. Peace.

BTW- I doubt Sherrill is involved. Personally, I'm not too invested in dude, but it seems McPhail has a plan for him: build up his value as a closer and deal him for some nice prospects a la Eric Gagne last year (before anyone gets too excited, I'm not saying he's as good as Gagne or that he'll return the same caliber of talent. Just saying the idea is to flip him around the trade deadline like Texas did Gagne in '07. Dig?) It's actually an interesting idea...if it works.

Dark- Agree with pretty much everything in your post too. The KW stuff was funny...and true.

INOK/Buddha/Delaware bird- Agree. Can't wait; should be a great year...even if the O's lose 100 games. At least this year I'll feel like it's leading to something. I'm truly excited to watch the Cubs too. They may turn into my NL team!

Finally, adun- Agreed. Or, more accurately, agreed to agree to disagree (LOL). We may not always see eye to eye, but I still respect your opinions and the manne by which you present them.

Now if you'll excuse me, I've gotta go pick a fight with a child or scream at an elderly woman or something. I'm just not used to so much...agreement and open-mindedness.

Good stuff all!

As that rare Cub fan who also roots for the Sox (my wife is a Sox fan), I would like to see Roberts come to the Sox if not the Cubs. And for Poreda, Ramirez? I'd do it in a heartbeat! A college pitcher who can only throw one pitch - albeit a 98 mph fastball? He's got reliever written all over him and Ramirez? -- a free agent from Cuba that any team could have had? Take em both. Take Danks...never understood the hype. He seems like Joe Average to me. Floyd? A fifth starter. Nice curve ball at times but he throws softer than Marshall. Take em all! Hey, I'd love to see Roberts on the north side but I'll take him on the south side too. Especially if that's all we have to give up.

Adun, Pstterson really impressed the Cubs and Piniella hinted he'd be the first person up if there was an injury. I think he's put himself back in the picture as a possible 2b/leadoff option in the future. His bat has always been good, I think it's his maturity that took a major step this spring. And his defense, if not spectacular, seems to be adequate. Fontenot is a useful utility guy but I think Patterson is the one to keep an eye on.

ah, crunchy,

Sadly, I agree with you as well (though I'm not sure how you can say all of that with such declarative certainty- I wish I could see the future with the same clarity. Actually, I take that back... Life must hold so few surprises...). You summed up the current situation fairly well.

Of course, the current situation wasn't being debated. Honestly, man...why? Your voice and opinion are valued, but (again) why insinuate yourself in the conversation, drop-kicking the ideas and opinions of others (primarily Cubs fans!) while unnecessarily making downright rude backhanded insults... Just because someone doesn't share your opinion of players and prospects doesn't mean you can't respect them. I constantly find myself baffled by some of the things you say here, crunchy, but I feel I've always demonstrated respect for your opinions and for you (in an abstract, internet kind of way). By responding to the lone O's fan on the thread by asking, 'where's basemonkey? Now that's a rational Orioles fan who's opinion I respect'..? That's a complete d#$* move (clearly implying you don't think I'm rational and that you don't respect my opinion). And I DON'T respect D*$#s!

Here I've been chatting with a number of Cubs fans, congenially discussing deal points, players, and just shooting the proverbial breeze- mindful all the while that this Roberts mess is likely behind us- and then you show up...desperate for the last word, demanding your 'rightful place' as hardline voice for all things Cubbie- a narc at Woodstock; a parent at summer camp.

Every time I come on this site, you're here, rallying the troops under Hendry's flag. OK. We get it. You like the guy. Cool. Speak from your bully pulpit, but leave other fans alone to make up their own minds...and express themselves.

No one said the deal was going to change, crunchy! Quite the contrary, I think most are resigned to the fact that it is not going to happen. Some folks were just offering potential compromises- hypothetically or even philosophically. For the most part, they were Cubs fans. Is that what bothered you... That they might break rank and not 'vote along party lines?' 'Cuz none of us have any say in this whatsoever, dude! Lighten up. Furthermore, the ideas you misidentified and shot down, didn't even say Roberts was worth any more than what's been offered. Buddha and scribble, for instance, simply presented alternatives that would be acceptable to THEM (scribble even added the caveat that he didn't think Roberts was worth as much).

Adun didn't even say THAT MUCH- holding to the whole Gallagher, Veal, Cedeno scenario that you, yourself adhere to. He simply agreed to disagree...but in a way that neither encroached upon others, nor dismissed or attacked anyone.

You call these posts pipe dreams, which we all understand to have a negative connotation; silly sentiment running counter to overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Critical to this definition is the idea's relationship with reality. What you seem to be missing is that no one was claiming their scenario would HAPPEN in reality. Each offered an individual opinion as to what Roberts might be worth TO THEM. Not a pipe dream; just a dream (and even that's misleading since these were Cubs fans who would much rather retain Roberts' services for as little as possible)- owing no fealty to reality and following only the logic of the individual. You may not like that, crunchy; you may not even respect it, but you'd be wise to understand it.