Article: Cubs Winter Top Prospects Rankings: #3 Matt Shaw

[Jason Ross]

The Cubs drafted Matt Shaw, the former Maryland Terrapin shortstop, in the first round of the 2023 draft, but he does not appear to be a future shortstop at the highest level. Will he be a second baseman? A third baseman? And where do we think he fits into the long-term plan?

Image courtesy of © Ron Schloerb/Cape Cod Times / USA TODAY NETWORK

2023 Season Review
The Big 10 has a great reputation for producing first-round draft picks in football, hockey, and basketball. Sadly for the conference, it does not have a long history of producing the same high-impact baseball draft picks. Matt Shaw, Big 10 player of the year in 2023, hopes to show that the Big 10 can produce hitters just like they can NFL quarterbacks. Selected 13th overall, the Cubs hope Matt Shaw can become a power threat in the middle of their order.

One thing that is clear with Shaw is that he's got impressive power despite his size. Standing at a listed 5'11" and weighing in at 185 lbs, the diminutive infielder doesn't look like a player who would become the all-time home run hitter at a Power-5 conference. Despite this, he hit over 50 home runs during three seasons at Maryland, punctuated by his impressive junior year. Shaw was not recruited as a future first-rounder but let his bat do the talking. Improving his batting average, on base, slugging, home runs, OPS, stolen bases, and doubles from his sophomore to his junior year, it was hard to deny that come to the All-Star break, someone was going to grab the athletic Terp shortstop relatively high in the draft. 

Upon being drafted by the Cubs, Shaw was immediately sent to the Arizona Complex league. In just three games, it was clear the former college product would not stay in Arizona long, picking up a .500 batting average in his first 11 plate appearances. While South Bend would likely present a higher challenge, this was also quickly proven false.

At South Bend, the hitter would take only a further 89 PAs to force a promotion once again. Hitting .393 over 20 games, with four home runs, four doubles, and three triples on his way to a whopping 197 wRC+, Shaw once again proved that minor league hitting at this level wasn't a problem for him. More impressive than those numbers may have been his 13.5% strikeout rate. Shaw does tend to swing early and often, but his bat-to-ball skills and a swing that shortens his large leg kick with two strikes helped him keep the strikeouts quite low. On August 27th, the Cubs decided they had seen enough and once again promoted the young hitter to Tennessee. 

Another level yet similar story would ensue. Matt Shaw would be a vital member of the Southern League Championship-winning Tennessee Smokies in another small, albeit impressive sample size. In 15 games, Shaw would hit another three home runs, four doubles, and a triple, finishing with a 120 wRC+. By the end of the season, Shaw had just 170 PAs but had already sped through three levels with strong successes at each.

Not everything was perfect, however, as there was one glaring flaw in the power hitter's game: his plate approach. Displaying a hyper-aggressive "swing at almost anything" style at the plate, Shaw walked under 5% of the time at every level. While his strikeouts remain in check, his highest strikeout rate is just over 17% at AA Tennessee. Eventually, pitchers are going to be good enough to begin to exploit his free-swinging style. This is something to watch as we move forward into 2024. 

2024 Season Outlook and ETA
It's expected that Shaw is at least placed back in Tennessee to begin the season, as 15 games is likely too small of a sample size for the Cubs to assume he's mastered the level (though it took only a few more at high-A South Bend for the Cubs to move him up, so who knows?). If the slugger can continue where he left off, it will likely be a short stay, and by May 1st, he could even see his bags packed for Iowa. This is a fairly decently likely outcome with how comfortable he looked last year at the level. Iowa, however, should provide the kind of challenge he should need.

Getting Shaw to stay within the zone and pick out his strikes (and not just any old strike) will be important for his development. A >5% walk rate is too low, and the hitter will eventually start getting himself out on pitcher's strikes. His bat-to-ball skills are certainly a plus, as well as his power, but if he swings at everything, he won't get himself into the kinds of favorable counts that will allow him to flash that power. There's something to be said about waiting for your pitch, and while there's likely always going to be a fairly aggressive style, taking the foot off the gas just a little would probably be good for him.

Defensively, it's hard to pick where he'll end up. First things first: He's not a shortstop at the next level. He's a little squatty, and while he's athletic, he won't stick here. When asked who Shaw compares himself to, he has said, "Dustin Pedroia," you can see it in his stature, his bat, and, if he ends up at second base, his position. The problem is the Cubs don't have an opening at second base after they locked up Nico Hoerner until 2026 at least (unless a trade changes that, but that feels unlikely).

With how fast the Cubs have pushed Shaw and their current major league roster needing a better solution as of writing this article, his ultimate home in Chicago may be at third. Third base, though, is a bit of an awkward fit because the Terp isn't expected to be a shortstop due to his lack of arm strength (usually considered a necessity for solid third base defense). The Cubs did a great job of extracting plus defense out of another weak-armed second baseman last year in Nick Madrigal, a player who I never thought would be a capable third baseman, so it's unfair to discount this path as impossible. 

When will we see Matt Shaw coming to a major league stadium? It's possible to see him any time mid-season, though it shouldn't be counted on. The Cubs similarly pushed Kyle Schwarber from draft day to the MLB roster, as he debuted after just 124 games in the minor leagues between 2014 and 2015. It's hard to say that will happen here, as Shaw has under 50 games, but by July 1st, he'd pick up another 60 or so games and be fairly close to that total. Suppose the Cubs keep the current cast of characters at the third base position (Nick Madrigal recently re-signed Patrick Wisdom and Miles Mastrobuoni). In that case, poor production or an injury (at either second or third) could create an opening for him to slip through. However, he will likely make his MLB debut later, maybe even in September. The Cubs shouldn't count on Shaw but shouldn't discount the idea that he could be ready, either. Regardless, it should be a fun follow, and he has many of the hallmarks of a fast riser.

View full article

[CubinNY]

I love this guy and kudos to the Cubs for drafting him. I remember his interview where he said, "he can't wait to get started and fail with the best of them".  Well, he hasn't exactly failed yet. I'd love to see if he can play 3rd based on obvious need. But if he can't he makes a great trade target or makes Nico expendable. 

I'm looking forward to seeing him when he comes to Montgomery this Spring/Summer. 

[CubinNY]

If he can't play in the infield, can he Ian Happ his way to a position in LF? He's quick enough to handle the OF. 

I get the caveats about patience, but in college he walked more than he struck out. I'm looking forward to seeing how he adjusts once teams "get the book" (trademark, Dusty Baker, 2004) on him. 

Besides Horton, I'm most looking forward to seeing how he progresses. 

[Jason Ross]

I really don't think this is shiny new toy syndrome. All Shaw has done has perform thus far. It's not hard to see where people are excited about him. He's got draft pedigree, a history of performance in both college and the Cape, and now performance in South Bend and Tennessee (though small) to bank on. At least from my stand point, it isn't that he's just new...it's that to date every challenge thrown at him he's met or exceeded expectations. There's flaw there in a swing happy approach (and I did mention that plenty, at least in my opinion) but it isn't something that hasn't been ironed out with others. It's sometimes just okay with being happy about something, even if it is new. No issues debating whether he should be "number three" versus a few other players in the same tier of prospects (Caissie, Alcantara, most notably) but much the of the praise he's getting feels fairly warranted and seems supported by the industry as well. 

We'll see where we go from here and what he becomes. Though if you're hoping to trade him this offseason to a team who thinks he's a SS, I think you'd be hard pressed to find an organization who thinks he'll settle there. Which isn't to say he can't be traded, only that I think just about everyone out there is in a pretty hard agreement that he's just not a SS. 

Edited November 27, 2023 by 1908_Cubs

[Bertz]

This might be an overcorrection, but after Madrigal I'll never doubt someone can play 3rd on the basis of arm-strength again.

I think the offense is what has me most excited.  A lot of what he did last summer was just beat up on guys he should have.  But even at Tenn where he got challenged a bit he had a 6.7% swinging strike rate, which for MLB reference is tied with Jose Ramirez, and had a 17.6% HR/FB rate, which again for an MLB equivalent was tied with Nick Castellanos. 

Obviously doing that at AA =/= doing it at MLB, but even giving ground as he moves up the ladder we're legitimately looking at a guy who has 20+ HR power and will strike out ~15% of the time.  We haven't had one of those since Rizzo, and we haven't had a RHH one since Aramis.  So like even if Shaw doesn't walk at all that's an exciting wrinkle to add to our lineup.  I'm a *huge* believer in lineup diversity.  I firmly believe there are some add on effects to having e.g. Matt Shaw and Owen Caissie back-to-back in a lineup.  Jed's baseball aesthetic clearly tends towards guys on the Caissie end of the spectrum, which makes guys in the org like Shaw that much more valuable.

[Jason Ross]

59 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

SNTS in the sense that holes are more easily glossed over (sure you mention approach but both handwave away and reward it. Alcantara, the biggest SNTS guy from 2021, has been treated similarly since joining the org with no real progress on offense) and once you can do that the ceiling pretty much becomes whatever anyone is willing to imagine.

- I'd submit he neither met nor exceeded expectations during the debut (in the context that a first round college bat with so many PAs won't have any major issues with the low minors). One of the big drivers to his college offense was a juicy flyball rate in the 40s, but outside of the Rk level in MiLB his batted ball was a big meh with instead the GB rates nearing 50%. Throw in a 3:1 K/BB. For a player who is widely considered bat first this seems less than ideal for the 2020s. This may seem harsh to crack down on the debut but I'd submit that too is part of the protection being a SNT offers

- Whether teams think he will stick there or not is less important than the opportunity. This time last year Shaw wasn't even a SS or even infield prospect at all so the ultra conservative nature of sports will lean in that direction until the last possible second. He has  tools for the position and off the pro debut it's where the bat would play up most

 

Tom, while I respect your opinion, and always appreciate differing views, I have a hard time agreeing here. Matt Shaw posted a 197 wRC+ and a 120 wRC+ against age appropriate levels. He made strong contact, hit for power and contact, and showed out incredibly well. Tommy Troy, selected in the same range with a similar profile as Shaw (plus contact, plus power, short frame, questions on defense) did not have anywhere near the successes Shaw had, for example (posted a 114 wRC+ during 99 PA's in A+ on his own). If these results don't even "meet expectations" than I fear the issue is not with Matt Shaw and with the expectations placed on him. It's also pretty fair to expect that the Chicago Cubs feel as though he, at the very least "met" expectations or they wouldn't have promoted him to Tennessee. Ultimately, the Cubs have piles more data and scouting than we do, and therefore, carry far more weight here in that determination.

I think we should also point out that much of his MiLB data has yet to stabilize (including both his ground ball and his fly ball rate). While I will also point out, most of his other data has yet to stabilize at any individual level, the only data people can really point to as being even "meh" is groundball/flyball or his walk rate (which is really just a product of approach, one of the known concerns with Shaw). In the end, it's not enough information at any level right not to truly change what we think of Shaw, but there's plenty to likely begin to confirm things. Shaw has an approach that should lead to pretty good flyball rates. We believe his bat to ball skills are quality, and that he has some approach things to fix. The only thing not super seen in the data is flyball/groundball, and this has yet to stabilize.  I think you're placing far too much importance on small sample size flyball data instead of a more holistic approach here. 

Edited November 27, 2023 by 1908_Cubs

[craig]

Key questions for me:

1. How much HR power?  
2. 3B-defense?
3. Pull?

1.  I'm less concerned with the low-walk swing-away approach.  If he swings at strikes, and hits them, his walk totals will be modest.  If he's chasing everything, that's a problem, but not swinging-at and hitting strikes.  Eventually I'd like to see fair share of walks, but I think that's a much more adjustable thing for a guy who isn't K-oriented.  Hits are better than walks, HR's are better than singles.  

2.  Short term, the 3B-question is central.  I get that his arm isn't great, and it's not like he's a stud SS anyway.   But, I assume most guys who played SS can adapt to playing 3B, even if not necessarily at a high level, and even without an excellent arm.  *IF* the bat is there, he doesn't need to be gold-glove.  45th-percentile 3B defense is OK with an .800-OPS bat.  Obviously 3B is the open spot in our lineup.  I hope Cubs don't mess around with the SS/2B/3B/LF usage this spring.  Put him at 3B and do nothing but 3B, 3B, 3B.  *IF* he can get that to work, he's got a straight shot to be a regular in a good contending Cubs lineup.  3B is the way.  I wonder if the Cubs tossing $2.75M to bring Wisdom back doesn't suggest they don't also hope that Shaw will be the 3B of the future?  They are willing to roster-fill pathwork 3B this spring, in hopes that Shaw is the future, and perhaps as soon as August he'll be up and helping a 2024 playoff team?  If he hits, he doesn't need to be Chapman or even Madrigal at 3B.  

3.  Power?  Obviously the defensive-acceptability threshold shift with the bat.  I wonder how much HR-power he's really got, versus more advanced pitching?  15HR versus 27HR, that's a big difference.  A bunch of hits and BA/OBP, a bunch of bases and slug, an extra dozen HR's is a whole bunch of OPS, like 100 OPS points.  Is this a guy who's going to hit and slug enough where he'd be an asset DH, or asset OF, or asset 3B even with somewhat below-average defense?  Or maybe more like Hoerner with a little more power, a low-walk contact hitter, maybe with 12-15 HR (Hoerner hit 9), but not a guy well into the 20's?  HR-level really matters.

4.  Pull?  I didn't see all of his HR's.  But my recall is that many of the ones I saw were opposite-field, RF-line pokes.  No big-league HR guys are hitting 20 HR's down the opposite line, so I'm a little nervous that his power is small-sample fluky.  I'm curious how much pull-capacity he has or will develop, and think he'll need to be able to yank some.  

5.  LF seems like a reasonable fallback position if he fails at 3B.  Obviously the opportunity and the hitting-expectation changes if he needs to be a winner in LF.  

6.  2B:  Obviously I want an asset starter for my team, and soon.  Shaw won't be that at 2B.  But yeah, if he fails at 3B, obviously you an hope he becomes capable at 2B and becomes a 2B/DH trade candidate.  

7.  Overall I like him ahead of Caissie/Alcantara.  Hitting is the hardest thing, and if he can hit for contact, his chance of being a total fail is reduced.  He seems like a much safer guy than Caissie/Alcantara.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

1 hour ago, craig said:

4.  Pull?  I didn't see all of his HR's.  But my recall is that many of the ones I saw were opposite-field, RF-line pokes.  No big-league HR guys are hitting 20 HR's down the opposite line, so I'm a little nervous that his power is small-sample fluky.  I'm curious how much pull-capacity he has or will develop, and think he'll need to be able to yank some.  

Personally I think this is a very good thing.  Shaw had a swing-happy approach and was consistently doing damage to the opposite field, and those that I saw both HR and 2B/3B were mostly line drives as opposed to fly balls drifting into a gap/over the fence.  I think there's a lot more opportunity for him to be a little more discerning and do *more* damage with his swings rather than there is risk his pop was a SSS fluke.

[Outshined_One]

Shaw's in such a weird spot in my mind's eye.  I kinda agree with Tom that we have a bit of recency bias and SNTS with Shaw in terms of projection/evaluation, but it's not just that he's a recent draftee.  He rocketed through the system and hit the crap out of the ball at every stop.  I'd lean into the skepticism if Shaw had been drafted and was just decent in an extended South Bend stint, but positive results are positive results.

As has been repeatedly stated, though, where things get mucky with Shaw is his future ML position.  It's worth pointing out that Shaw is roughly three inches taller than Madrigal, so Shaw's height isn't as much of an issue at 3B as has been raised elsewhere, but Shaw still needs to prove he can pick it there.  If he can't, then he'll likely be prime trade bait, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.  Sometimes a guy's best value to a team is as a trade piece, and that may very well be Shaw's lot in life.

[craig]

49 minutes ago, Outshined_One said:

... Shaw's height isn't as much of an issue at 3B as has been raised elsewhere, but Shaw still needs to prove he can pick it there.  If he can't, then he'll likely be prime trade bait, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.  Sometimes a guy's best value to a team is as a trade piece, and that may very well be Shaw's lot in life.

Yes.  But given that we're supposedly walking into a contending window, we don't have any 3B prospects close. 

We all know this, of course, but having Shaw hypothetically work at 3B could be super transformative for the future.  Not having to poke along with Wisdom/Madrigal at 3rd....  Not having to drain trade capital and/or financial capital to fill that hole, would really change a lot.  Getting a good-hitting, acceptable-defense 3B for years of club control including 3 super-cheap pre-arb years, that has all kinds of beautiful implications for the rest of the roster.  

I feel that same way about Ballesteros and Amaya.  **If** Ballesteros can get in shape and stay in shape and handle the position defensively, and you get 6 years of cost-controlled asset, it impacts everything.

[Jason Ross]

10 hours ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Ah, I think this gap in perception is just this!

First, I'll say that the baseline here is that we all generally agree that Matt Shaw can hit. He took nearly 1200 PAs in college that demonstrated there's some contact and power there, and that didn't really stop into the pros.

From there I would submit a more holistic approach is more into gathering already limited info than tossing it out. If we're going to weigh his unstabilized MiLB wRC+ and positive stats (tbf it seems safe to say he can make contact) then all should be on the table. I would add that elite among the elite among the elite college bat prospects like Kris Bryant and Alex Bregman did not see this dip in batted ball after being drafted regardless of sample size, took walks too

- The overall contact + power offensive game into AA met my expectations just fine, can't emphasize enough expectations included this guy hitting low minors pitching during his debut, but the overall approach did not. It seems plenty fair to ask for the whole shebang (power, patience, batted ball) of a guy who may be starting for the Cubs in the middle of a pennant race at a new position next year. Picks 10 and 13 overall from the 2023 and 2022 drafts are already productive MLers too, Neto seems like a secret superstar in the making, so that a first round college bat first college position player with nearly 1200 PAs under his belt got to AA with a less than ideal approach just isn't moving my meter like it might as impressive as it can seem

- It's seems fair to question his OBP potential at the ML level. He walked just 3 times in 70 AA PAs, 9 times in 170 MiLB PAs, actually had only a ~league OBP in 2022 (.381 vs a league of .383), and the overall .412 career OBP in the Big 10 looks less impressive when the league ran OBPs in the .380s

- It's hard to say how much power he'll actually get to at the ML level anytime soon if he's hitting groundballs and not being patient? Joe Doyle mentioned ~109 max EVs during the season which is fine but not standout or even the avg ML max

The positives like contact, getting to the power, the strong college career, the breezy debut,etc aren't lost on me but overall I struggle to see the all around skills of a soon to be first division starter especially if moved to a corner

 

It feels like we're moving some goal posts here. It's changed from "he didn't meet expectations" to "I don't see the skillset of a first division starter", both of which I disagree on, but for different reasons. 

You remain overly hung up, for my tastes, on GB% and FB%. I don't see any major concerns here. Tweaks are likely to come, and I expect these things such as EV and LA are generally tied to the same thing with his hyper-aggressivity. These seem like minor symptoms to date of the underlying issue. Being a bit more choosey will place him in better counts, create more walks, and allow him to put more damage on pitches. I think it all comes back to the same thing...Matt Shaw has plus contact, plus power but to really get the most out of these skills needs to learn a little bit better of an approach. I don't think it's fair to expect a college hitter to have fixed these things over the course of a 170 PA MiLB stint. 

Which is why it comes back to "do I see an MLB first division start's skillset?" and that's an easy "yes". His skillset is that of a 55 grade hit tool, a 55 grade power tool (these are more averages, as others will be a deviation above or below here and there) with 45 grade defense and a 50 grade athleticism. That's what first division starters look like. He may not be a superstar, but he doesn't have to be to be a first division starter. I also see the flaws in the skillset, so those grades are the "what he can be" not "what he is today" (if he was that today he'd be in the MLB). But if our line for "what makes a first division starter and not" is "is imperfect today" than I think we're being rather unfair, because every prospect except truly generational talents have pitfalls and weaknesses that needed ironed out along the way. They needed to refine something, much like Shaw does. Shaw may never fix those weaknesses, refine those edges, but the skillset remains. 

Edited November 28, 2023 by 1908_Cubs

[CubinNY]

We have to see him fail. He hasn’t yet. It’s easy to say he needs to do X when he’s not doing that. But he hasn’t need to do anything different because he’s destroying the baseball. He doesn’t need to be more patient. He doesn’t need to walk more. He needs to keep doing what he’s doing until it doesn’t work. When that happens we will see what type of player he is. 
 

However, on the other side of the ball he needs to shore up his arm and fielding. 

I expect that will happen at some point this year because we don’t likely live in the Matrix made for Matt Shaw. 

Edited November 28, 2023 by CubinNY

[Jason Ross]

3 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Noooope, not even a little bit the case. He can both not meet expectations by not showing a complete offensive game *and* not having that full set of skills on offense (again off a nearly 1200 PA college career) is less than ideal for someone expected to be a first division starter. I

This all sounds fancy but another way to put what's most on display is that he's a contact hitter who can get to power but doesn't have a ton of raw, has all around approach issues whether it's his K:BB, willingness to reach, or the uninspiring batted ball during his debut on offense, and without a defensive home. Can he get better? Sure. Would we be putting the cart before the horse just making assumptions in his favor? At least a little bit, yes

All well and good so long as we're also willing to remember that every prospect doesn't make it to stardom for great teams. Most pitfalls and weaknesses don't get ironed out to that extent if at all. Especially if he's so good already then life's already pretty unfair: a draft immediately robs of him of money, he's further robbed by falling, and as soon as he makes the MLs the counting of his pennies and age will intensify

So to sum me up rn: this bat first prospect who took nearly 1200 PAs in college came into MiLB, did very well, but showed all around approach issues from the start that - in conjunction with raw defense - suggests the ceiling may not be a slam dunk first division guy  like already imagined. Is that really so unfair? For a player many are already handing the 3B job in Chicago to? Prooooobably not even if it's critical

I'll address specifically the bolded: while I still disagree with some things (and that's fine, all's fair in love, and war, and prospect evaluations, frankly), I find this post far more fair than where we started, questioning whether he had met expectations to date or not. I'd rather we get to a point of fairness, even if we may see things differently, than unfairly looking at a prospect, if that makes sense. That's usually a very good place to be at the end of a discussion.

Edited November 28, 2023 by 1908_Cubs

[craig]

Just to add on:  With prospects I do a lot more "hoping" than being-sure-of.  I *HOPE* he proves able to play an acceptable 3B, but I don't assume so.  I *HOPE* he hits a decent number of HR's, but I'm not sure.  I *HOPE* he does great this summer and by August that he's a preferable 3B than Wisdom, Mastrobuoni, or Madrigal, but I'm not "gifting" him that or assuming that.  I "HOPE" he takes enough walks to support an asset OBP, but that has yet to be seen. 

Just like I hope Ballesteros ends up able to catch, and that Caissie, Alcantara, and Canario make enough contact to get to their prodigious power and hit so many HR's that they become asset players.  

Like 1908, I'd put Shaw #3, ahead of Caissie and Alcantara.  In my experience, a lot of SS's are able to transition to 3B, even without rockets, so his probability of become acceptable at 3rd seems probably higher than Ballesteros of becoming acceptable at catcher, for example.  I also think guys who are gifted contact hitters have an easier time making modifications, whether to boost walk rates or fly-ball rates or pull-frequency or whatever, compared to guys who have trouble making contact.  Very optimistic.  But there is no guarantee he'll be an asset starting 3B.  

And yeah, I do consider the opportunity factor.  Caissie may develop into an acceptable LF, as good or better than guys like Schwarber or Castellano or Manny Ramirez back in his day.  But Happ and Suzuki are under 3-years of contact and are both good all-around players.  So there isn't a direct path to the Cubs lineup for Caissie.  Caissie might have a strong season and seem kinda ready, but not take Happs starts.  But *IF* Shaw has a strong season and seems kinda ready, I think taking Madrigal's starts is not implausible.  

[Transmogrified Tiger]

 

[Jason Ross]

41 minutes ago, Transmogrified Tiger said:

 

Whether asked by the Cubs or personal choice...Shaw knows. That's the path to the MLB.

[craig]

Love that.