Starting rotation options available now

[Rcal10]

13 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

My guess would be no. He's 34 and they already have him under contract next year. 

He is 34 but his innings are not much different than Cease, Valdez, Flaherty, Gallen or any other pitcher around 30 years old who has been in a rotation for 6 or more years. I am not suggesting they extend him, but what is more important when determine if a pitcher will start fading? Pure age or innings pitched? And if they did extend him I would think it would be AT MOST 2 years. And probably just one and an option. 

[Bertz]

If there's an opportunity to add one more year to Boyd's contract in exchange for an AAV bump I'd do it.  Say replace his 1/$17M with a 2/$40M?  I wouldn't want to go out any further though.

The biggest storyline for the Cubs this winter is Tucker, obviously.  The second biggest story IMO is whether the team can do anything to try and mitigate the post 2026 roster cliff.  Extending Boyd would help with that, while obviously being player friendly to boot.

[Tryptamine]

12 minutes ago, Bertz said:

If there's an opportunity to add one more year to Boyd's contract in exchange for an AAV bump I'd do it.  Say replace his 1/$17M with a 2/$40M?  I wouldn't want to go out any further though.

The biggest storyline for the Cubs this winter is Tucker, obviously.  The second biggest story IMO is whether the team can do anything to try and mitigate the post 2026 roster cliff.  Extending Boyd would help with that, while obviously being player friendly to boot.

This would be the limit of where I'd go. If he'll basically waive that 2027 mutual option and make it a guaranteed 20M, then it's a worthwhile risk. If he's looking for more then one year and I'm absolutely out. 

[Rcal10]

40 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

This would be the limit of where I'd go. If he'll basically waive that 2027 mutual option and make it a guaranteed 20M, then it's a worthwhile risk. If he's looking for more then one year and I'm absolutely out. 

I can see this. 2027 becomes a guarantee at $17M. But maybe, if they had to, they add ‘28 with a team option of $3M buy out or $17M yearly. Same end result as Bertz, most likely, but allows the Cubs to have another year if Boyd finds the fountain of youth, as Morton did late in his career. 

[Stratos]

10 hours ago, Bertz said:

If there's an opportunity to add one more year to Boyd's contract in exchange for an AAV bump I'd do it.  Say replace his 1/$17M with a 2/$40M?  I wouldn't want to go out any further though.

The biggest storyline for the Cubs this winter is Tucker, obviously.  The second biggest story IMO is whether the team can do anything to try and mitigate the post 2026 roster cliff.  Extending Boyd would help with that, while obviously being player friendly to boot.

The unknowns about the innings over a season capable for Boyd is the question.  Jed likes to buy low,  sell high.  Buying/ extending high here may or may not be the right move, hard to say.  Not Jed's style though.  Age isn't on Boyd's side either.  The Cubs FO  seems capable in finding undervalued pitching talent in FA and avoiding overvalued.

It will be hard to replace Nico.  Good OF or DH is easier.  1st and 2nd rounders drafted this year are college OF's, plus 2 good ones in our system in AAA.  If Tucker doesn't resign I could see them filling 2 of the 3 OF/DH openings internally with one externally (or one of Happ/Seiya resigned).

[Rcal10]

6 hours ago, Stratos said:

The unknowns about the innings over a season capable for Boyd is the question.  Jed likes to buy low,  sell high.  Buying/ extending high here may or may not be the right move, hard to say.  Not Jed's style though.  Age isn't on Boyd's side either.  The Cubs FO  seems capable in finding undervalued pitching talent in FA and avoiding overvalued.

It will be hard to replace Nico.  Good OF or DH is easier.  1st and 2nd rounders drafted this year are college OF's, plus 2 good ones in our system in AAA.  If Tucker doesn't resign I could see them filling 2 of the 3 OF/DH openings internally with one externally (or one of Happ/Seiya resigned).

So my question is does age matter with a pitcher or number of innings on his arm? Boyd is 34, but he has pitched similar innings to guys 29-31. Is he any more likely to decline during the next 3 years as those guys?🤷 I am not talking injuries. Be used to me any pitcher could get hurt. I am talking pure ability to get guys out when healthy. Will he lose it faster than the others because of his age, or since innings are similar so they all have the same chance at regression. Is there some magic number like 1600 innings or magic age like after 35 where regression should be expected? 

[Geographyhater8888]

Any shot Horton gets dealt instead of Cassie if a Joe Ryan end up available? He’ll cost a top prospect or young talent, with the uncertainty over Tuckers future and is Horton at all in play?

[Rcal10]

11 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

Any shot Horton gets dealt instead of Cassie if a Joe Ryan end up available? He’ll cost a top prospect or young talent, with the uncertainty over Tuckers future and is Horton at all in play?

I would say for Ryan or Gore I would be ok if Horton was in play. If he isn’t, I  am pretty sure Wiggins would be. So they would be losing one young pitcher. Off the top of my head, those are the only 2 pitchers who have any realistic chance of being traded that I would consider putting Horton in a deal for. 

[Jason Ross]

20 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

Any shot Horton gets dealt instead of Cassie if a Joe Ryan end up available? He’ll cost a top prospect or young talent, with the uncertainty over Tuckers future and is Horton at all in play?

I would guess that while anything is "non-zero" Cade Horton being in a trade feels extremely unlikely. Teams who are in the middle of pennant races rarely trade from their MLB roster as it is taking one step backwards to gain two. 

I would suspect Ben Brown (who is in Triple-A) or Jaxon Wiggins (who I feel is already an unlikely addition but might go in a big-type trade) are much more likely.

[Rcal10]

6 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

I would guess that while anything is "non-zero" Cade Horton being in a trade feels extremely unlikely. Teams who are in the middle of pennant races rarely trade from their MLB roster as it is taking one step backwards to gain two. 

I would suspect Ben Brown (who is in Triple-A) or Jaxon Wiggins (who I feel is already an unlikely addition but might go in a big-type trade) are much more likely.

I would agree with this, but if the Cubs see an innings limitation to Horton he wouldn’t be considered a rotation piece the remainder of the season. That is the only reason I could see them doing that. As you said, very unlikely, however.
But, I am curious to what you think is more important as a sign of expected regression for a pitcher. Is it strictly age, or are innings on the arm more important? I asked that question about Boyd. I was hoping you and a few other knowledgeable posters could answer that. Should the Cubs be concerned moving past this year with Boyd because he is 34, or should they see he has throw a little over 1,000 innings in his career, which is more like a guy 29-31. Is he any more likely to regress within the next 3+ years than a younger guy with the same innings on his arm? 

[Jason Ross]

9 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I would agree with this, but if the Cubs see an innings limitation to Horton he wouldn’t be considered a rotation piece the remainder of the season. That is the only reason I could see them doing that. As you said, very unlikely, however.
But, I am curious to what you think is more important as a sign of expected regression for a pitcher. Is it strictly age, or are innings on the arm more important? I asked that question about Boyd. I was hoping you and a few other knowledgeable posters could answer that. Should the Cubs be concerned moving past this year with Boyd because he is 34, or should they see he has throw a little over 1,000 innings in his career, which is more like a guy 29-31. Is he any more likely to regress within the next 3+ years than a younger guy with the same innings on his arm? 

The Cubs are likely to use Horton in the BP and have roster cliffs after 2026. Horton, even if not in the "rotation" will likely play an important role. Teams don't usually trade from their MLB roster, and Horton is probably among the least likely to be traded in the entire organization who's trade likelihood is above 0. I wouldn't even overly concern myself with the thought. 

If we saw exhaustion in a pitcher, we would expect to see some combination of loss of velo, loss of mechanics (either because they're tired and getting involuntarily "lazy" or to overthrow to compensate for lack of velo), loss of control, loss of pitch shape. I'm sure the Cubs are monitoring those things between now and end of 2026.

Is he any more or less likely to regress? That's the rub, ain't it. But here's the thing that is counterintuitive to our understanding of pitchers and their fear of TJS or arm injury; pitchers, not hitters are aging more gracefully league wide. There are more pitchers aged 35+ having success than hitters. You always have the "one pitch away" fear with an arm, and Boyd has not been the picture of health. That said, if the TJS was the root cause. and that's taken care of, he may be less likely to regress as the rate of recidivism on TJS usually jumps around 6+ years out, so there's reason both way to believe he could be risky and reasons to believe he wouldn't be.

Would I expect the Cubs to extend a 35+ year old Matthew Boyd post-2026? No, I wouldn't. The Cubs under Hoyer tend to target mid-rotation arms that don't pop on paper or excitement and like to get an undervalued arm based on the rest of the league. Boyd, if he repeats or comes close to repeating 2024, would be anything but; max-value Boyd. The Cubs are more likely to try to find the next Boyd than to resign the Boyd, if that makes sense.

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, Jason Ross said:

The Cubs are likely to use Horton in the BP and have roster cliffs after 2026. Horton, even if not in the "rotation" will likely play an important role. Teams don't usually trade from their MLB roster, and Horton is probably among the least likely to be traded in the entire organization who's trade likelihood is above 0. I wouldn't even overly concern myself with the thought. 

If we saw exhaustion in a pitcher, we would expect to see some combination of loss of velo, loss of mechanics (either because they're tired and getting involuntarily "lazy" or to overthrow to compensate for lack of velo), loss of control, loss of pitch shape. I'm sure the Cubs are monitoring those things between now and end of 2026.

Is he any more or less likely to regress? That's the rub, ain't it. But here's the thing that is counterintuitive to our understanding of pitchers and their fear of TJS or arm injury; pitchers, not hitters are aging more gracefully league wide. There are more pitchers aged 35+ having success than hitters. You always have the "one pitch away" fear with an arm, and Boyd has not been the picture of health. That said, if the TJS was the root cause. and that's taken care of, he may be less likely to regress as the rate of recidivism on TJS usually jumps around 6+ years out, so there's reason both way to believe he could be risky and reasons to believe he wouldn't be.

Would I expect the Cubs to extend a 35+ year old Matthew Boyd post-2026? No, I wouldn't. The Cubs under Hoyer tend to target mid-rotation arms that don't pop on paper or excitement and like to get an undervalued arm based on the rest of the league. Boyd, if he repeats or comes close to repeating 2024, would be anything but; max-value Boyd. The Cubs are more likely to try to find the next Boyd than to resign the Boyd, if that makes sense.

Thanks for the response. I was just curious about what is more important, age or innings in an arm. I used Boyd, but he was just an example. Sounds like there may not be enough data to determine. But as you said, pitchers are pitching well into there late 30’s more often than hitters hit well at that time. Back to Boyd, Cubs have a lot of contracts ending in ‘26. As Bertz suggested he could see one year added to Boyd, if for nothing else, to have one less player to replace in ‘26. 

[Geographyhater8888]

3 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

I would say for Ryan or Gore I would be ok if Horton was in play. If he isn’t, I  am pretty sure Wiggins would be. So they would be losing one young pitcher. Off the top of my head, those are the only 2 pitchers who have any realistic chance of being traded that I would consider putting Horton in a deal for. 

With the season Ryan’s having and another year of control, I don’t see Jed trading the prospects the Twins will want in return for reasons we already know like the 2 names mentioned unless I’m overvaluing Ryan.

 

 

[Stratos]

16 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

So my question is does age matter with a pitcher or number of innings on his arm? Boyd is 34, but he has pitched similar innings to guys 29-31. Is he any more likely to decline during the next 3 years as those guys?🤷 I am not talking injuries. Be used to me any pitcher could get hurt. I am talking pure ability to get guys out when healthy. Will he lose it faster than the others because of his age, or since innings are similar so they all have the same chance at regression. Is there some magic number like 1600 innings or magic age like after 35 where regression should be expected? 

His age makes him more likely to decline than someone a few years younger.  The mileage on his arm isn't in his favour IMO in terms of staying healthy while trying to throw 150 innings a season.

A pitcher isn't like a car.  A pitcher can become stronger the more they pitch.  But these days it seems like a pitchers arm is a certain # of pitches away from the next TJS.

It's hard to want to invest in a guy years down the line when they have a career filled with injuries and missing so much time.

[Stratos]

16 hours ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

Any shot Horton gets dealt instead of Cassie if a Joe Ryan end up available? He’ll cost a top prospect or young talent, with the uncertainty over Tuckers future and is Horton at all in play?

I still think Horton has a delivery that probably puts a lot of stress on the arm.   I'd be fine trading him in the right deal.  No idea if the Cubs think the same.  They liked him enough to use their 1st rounds pick on him. 

[Stratos]

15 hours ago, Jason Ross said:

 The Cubs are more likely to try to find the next Boyd than to resign the Boyd, if that makes sense.

Agree.

[Rcal10]

8 hours ago, Stratos said:

His age makes him more likely to decline than someone a few years younger.  The mileage on his arm isn't in his favour IMO in terms of staying healthy while trying to throw 150 innings a season.

A pitcher isn't like a car.  A pitcher can become stronger the more they pitch.  But these days it seems like a pitchers arm is a certain # of pitches away from the next TJS.

It's hard to want to invest in a guy years down the line when they have a career filled with injuries and missing so much time.

Stratos, I respect your opinion, but I was asking if anyone knew of a study in baseball that determines when a pitcher should expect regression. I just used Boyd as an example since he does have the innings if a typical 30-31 year old pitcher, not a 34 year old pitcher. I also doubt the Cubs extend him. But I did like Bertz idea of maybe making year 3(Cubs option year) a guarantee so that they lose one less guy after ‘26. That would be the longest I would consider with guarantees. 

[Geographyhater8888]

On 7/17/2025 at 6:15 AM, Jason Ross said:

I will never grow sick of questions. Keep asking, my guy. Baseball is a community. Consider this "passing it on". I only learned because I asked questions and people two decades ago gave me a crash course. 

So, think of WAR as our best single-all-encompassing number, but don't think of it in absolutes. WAR in general is a great approximation, taking in tons of data points (offense, defense, ballpark, neutralizing for era, pitching, etc) and dumping it into an easy-to-digest number, like...four. On the surface, that's kind of insane. Sincerely, it's a revolutionary concept for a sport so inundated in different numbers to boil something down to a number (in almost every case) under 10, with just a single decimal point and it mean something. Like, when you think it of it, it's kind of insane. But because of that, it's prone to being somewhat inaccurate in terms of absolution. 

Anecdotally, Kyle Tucker has been worth 3.8 fWAR and Francisco Lindor, 3.6. Should we really concern ourselves over fractional aspects of a win? Nah, they're virtually the same value. Maybe your team needs a RF over a SS or whatever, but value-proposition wise? The same, essentially. No use debating it. 

When it comes to fWAR and run differential, etc, lots of things go into that. Strength of schedule can play a part (of which fWAR does not account for, because over the a 162 grind it's not really a factor in it) especially in partial seasons, sequencing plays a part of it, and a full-team aspect plays apart in it. For example, we can't just add all of the fWAR up on a team and say "well, their fWAR and their win totals are different so something here is fishy!" It's a cool way to project things out, but they have enough variabilities that they don't entirely equate. That said, they usually are close; for example, having the best run differential and the 3rd best fWAR makes sense. We rarely see a team leading in fWAR and then, say, 22nd in RD. That would raise some weird flags.

 

If you have the time to watch this I’d love to hear your thoughts. The gist here is exit velo doesn’t account for top spin that you see from pull hitters where the ball travels further. A lot of Shaw’s contact is opposite field and up the middle with a lot of his balls dying from the lack of wind resistance. His 2 home runs were all pulled. 
 

let me know if you have the chance.

[Jason Ross]

1 hour ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

If you have the time to watch this I’d love to hear your thoughts. The gist here is exit velo doesn’t account for top spin that you see from pull hitters where the ball travels further. A lot of Shaw’s contact is opposite field and up the middle with a lot of his balls dying from the lack of wind resistance. His 2 home runs were all pulled. 
 

let me know if you have the chance.

Yeah, I mean, this is the reason why someone like Isaac Parades is built specifically for Tropicana and Daikon Park (formerly Minute Maid. Apparently, he's got...the juice at these parks. Heh. Heh...I'll see my way out). He has pretty weak EV but extremely high pull rate and flyball rate. Cody Bellinger is similar. Pulling the ball can hide weak contact. It's why teams try to get kids to pull the ball more. 

Now, I don't think that's a reason to ignore xData in any way shape or form; there are statistical outliers among any data, it's knowing the data. Kyle Hendricks was a FIP-beater; if you don't walk hitters and get a lot of ground balls, you can have a better ERA than your xERA or xFIP. It's why we don't use data as silver bullets and instead, use a lot of data to explain a hitter. I like the idea of adding direction to xData, it's a good thing, but I also think when we discuss hitters, it's important to bring up lots of data points regardless, which helps to limit the concept of xData beaters. Much like we can find the Kyle Hendricks of the world, and have for the better part of a decade been able to identify a skillset of pitchers who typically keep their ERA above their xFIP, we can do the same with hitters (and to behonest, have been for a bit). 

When it pertains to Matt Shaw, notice where his footing is today versus where it was, say, a week ago. I noticed it yesterday. I mentioned back on Friday as the lineup was shown for Yankees series that I suspected we would see two things:
1. Matt Shaw would sit the entire Yankees series
2. We would see him pop back up in the lineup directly after the ASB with something new to diagnose.

Not to pat myself on the back too hard, but outside of a PH attempt on Sunday, kind of nailed both. It was a hunch but based on how the Cubs like to do these things, had a pretty good feeling on that hunch. 

I'll leave the updates to Shaw below in a spoiler so if you want to challenge yourself to notice what I did, you can play along! Or if you already noticed it/just want to discuss it, peep it below:

Spoiler

Shaw's front foot was neither in a toed-in position as he had been, but also has been brought out slightly open by an inch or so. With a toe-in stance, this causes Shaw and his front shoulder to dive into a hit, making him successful going the other way a bit more. His shoulder stays closed off. It also makes it harder to open up as he has to yank through it. 

With a more neutral footing and a slightly more open stance he does not need to dive into a ball any longer and can more easily open up. 

Part of the reason he was diving into the hit was likely where he was; his distance off the plate was quite far. He's also a short dude, with short levers. So to get to the outside pitch, he almost had to dive in from his positioning. The Cubs have slowly tweaked parts of his swing:
1. He started moving closer, still with the leg kick and the toe-in
2. He starts to eliminate the big-big kick and went to a more controlled kick. Almost sweeping the leg.
3. Hands up. 
4. Leg kick to toe-tap timing mechanism. 
5. Eliminate toe-in, open up

It's easier to tweak each piece than to rip it all down. 

Here are all three swings from yesterday. He was able to hit the ball pretty well both inside and outside and hit the ball fairly well on all three swings
Lineout to CF
Single to CF
Lineout to 3b

 

[Geographyhater8888]

On 5/26/2025 at 11:19 PM, Stratos said:

Yeah they don't seem to like skipping off days.  I think they'll keep throwing Brown out there for now, not many options really.

Looking at his stats the K's, walks, and HR/9 are fine.  His FIP/xFIP are good.  In fact his stats really aren't much different than last year.  He has a .393 BABIP and given up a ton of hits so maybe some of it is bad luck.  The LOB% is pretty low too.  They've been hitting his FB hard both this year and last.

Hopefully its a location thing or they're just sitting on it due to the 2-pitch mix.

Missed his at bats yesterday but that’s good to see. Now that the weak opposite field contact doubles in his second stint are no longer missing fielders. It’s difficult to tweak your mechanics mid season and see immediate results, unless we’re talking a simple leg kick or too much head movement like PCA last year. 
 

Drom the surface his hand placement looks similar to Darwin Barney.

[Geographyhater8888]

Seeing that Jed loves loves playing the money ball lottery with guys like Shota and Boyd on discounts, I’m wondering if there’s an arm out there he’s seeking with a lower price tag with that upside he saw from Boyd and Shota. Don’t know any arms off the top of my head but a possibility as opposed to some of the more costly arms like Ryan, or even Kelly and Keller?

[Jason Ross]

22 minutes ago, Geographyhater8888 said:

Seeing that Jed loves loves playing the money ball lottery with guys like Shota and Boyd on discounts, I’m wondering if there’s an arm out there he’s seeking with a lower price tag with that upside he saw from Boyd and Shota. Don’t know any arms off the top of my head but a possibility as opposed to some of the more costly arms like Ryan, or even Kelly and Keller?

I doubt that the Cubs will target, say, a fixer upper. It is difficult to implement major changes mid-season and on the fly, harder given the time frame. The Cubs have plenty of room under the LT currently for 2025 and have a real shot to be a force. 

Jose Cuas is a good example of what can occur when you target mid-season changes. I don't hate the idea, but he needed time in Iowa to acclimate to a new mix. With the Cubs he really struggled to control his changes and it didn't work. 

That is a plan for a player you sign with a Spring Training to tinker and toy. Not a mid-year acquisition. 

Now, if you want an under the radar type who will be unimpressive on top line, but is actually pretty good, look at Washington's Mike Soroka. All of the peripherals scream breakout, including velocity increase, but his ERA sucks. This is almost assuredly based on pitching in front of the league's most atrocious defense leading to an unsustainable low left-on-base%. You probably don't need to tinker with him, just get him in front of a good defense and he has the look of a playoff caliber SP. I could see the Cubs going *that* route. He is a rental and should come cheaply. 

As an aside, he would be among the arms I could see the Cubs being interest in during the offseason as well. Age is on his side and his arrow appears to be pointing up. 

[Bertz]

Sharma says Brown will likely come back up to start tomorrow.  Presuming he stays up that would give him next Sunday vs. the Sox as well, and then this rotation slot wouldn't have another outing until after the deadline.

[Geographyhater8888]

1 hour ago, Jason Ross said:

I doubt that the Cubs will target, say, a fixer upper. It is difficult to implement major changes mid-season and on the fly, harder given the time frame. The Cubs have plenty of room under the LT currently for 2025 and have a real shot to be a force. 

Jose Cuas is a good example of what can occur when you target mid-season changes. I don't hate the idea, but he needed time in Iowa to acclimate to a new mix. With the Cubs he really struggled to control his changes and it didn't work. 

That is a plan for a player you sign with a Spring Training to tinker and toy. Not a mid-year acquisition. 

Now, if you want an under the radar type who will be unimpressive on top line, but is actually pretty good, look at Washington's Mike Soroka. All of the peripherals scream breakout, including velocity increase, but his ERA sucks. This is almost assuredly based on pitching in front of the league's most atrocious defense leading to an unsustainable low left-on-base%. You probably don't need to tinker with him, just get him in front of a good defense and he has the look of a playoff caliber SP. I could see the Cubs going *that* route. He is a rental and should come cheaply. 

As an aside, he would be among the arms I could see the Cubs being interest in during the offseason as well. Age is on his side and his arrow appears to be pointing up. 

The Mike Soroka prototype was what I was referring to. Not a reclamation project or finding lightening in a bottle for an a baller.

Joe Ryan is obviously the biggest prize, is he worth Owen Cassie with tuckers uncertain future, especially if you’re throwing in another top 5 prospect from the farm for Ryan?
 

He’s been impressive but also pitches in the weakest division in baseball which has inflated might inflate his numbers. I ask these questions because I don’t know sh!t. I’d like Castro too. I can make arguments for both, the team is basically a starter away after all.

off topic, to what degree do you see PCA sustaining his success at the plate and at what point will learning to take more pitches become a priority. I worry about how his game will age, although we’re years away from that mattering.

Whats your ceiling for Shaw and Horton if you don’t mind me pestering you every morning? From the naked eye I see Horton as a number 2 best case scenario. He’s getting whiffs but the strikeouts haven’t been there. If he averaged 98 mph instead of 96 I’d have a more optimistic outlook, because he lacks a truly filthy out pitch.

 

Edited July 20, 2025 by Geographyhater8888

[Geographyhater8888]

If someone told you Tucker would be fourth in homer runs and RBIs through the 98 game mark, people would probably guess it’s injury related.