2026 MLB Draft

[Outshined_One]

ESPN's final mock is up.

The Cubs' draft philosophy in this scenario appears to be "college dudes who hit really well on the Cape", which actually kinda tracks.  The way this draft plays out is also kind of a bummer, since, in the first round, most of the fun hitters are taken right in front of the Cubs and the college pitching that's available is a mixed bag.

I don't hate it, but I also don't love it.

[Bertz]

If thia team doesn't take a pitcher with one of their top 3 picks I will turn into the shocker I swear

(Willits is actually a pretty fun 3rd/4th rounder though tbh)

[Bertz]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7435150/2026/07/10/mlb-draft-final-mock-draft-grady-emerson-vahn-lackey-roch-cholowsky/?source=user_shared_article&unlocked_article_code=1.wlA.f2Uz.JQSXy1NIei7y&smid=ta-android-share

KLaw's last mock still has the Cubs taking Rose, but also seconds Hughes as a fit

[Outshined_One]

11 minutes ago, Bertz said:

If thia team doesn't take a pitcher with one of their top 3 picks I will turn into the shocker I swear

(Willits is actually a pretty fun 3rd/4th rounder though tbh)

I can easily talk myself into all three picks in a vacuum. Hughes is the sort of power hitter the system lacks, Natili is intriguing as a C prospect and has enough bat to produce elsewhere, and Willits has a legitimately fun profile who could be a sneaky good 2nd round underslot.

I get the general idea: save money up front on good/safe college hitters for big picks later.  I'd want to see the rest of the draft before passing judgment, but just these three by themselves is indeed underwhelming. 

[Jason Ross]

28 minutes ago, Bertz said:

If thia team doesn't take a pitcher with one of their top 3 picks I will turn into the shocker I swear

(Willits is actually a pretty fun 3rd/4th rounder though tbh)

I have a hard time thinking they will take three position players. That said, I do think there's merit to the idea that the Cubs are going to go under-under-under early to save big bucks for someone a bit later. This isn't the first place I've seen that posited. 

[Bertz]

19 minutes ago, Outshined_One said:

I can easily talk myself into all three picks in a vacuum. Hughes is the sort of power hitter the system lacks, Natili is intriguing as a C prospect and has enough bat to produce elsewhere, and Willits has a legitimately fun profile who could be a sneaky good 2nd round underslot.

I get the general idea: save money up front on good/safe college hitters for big picks later.  I'd want to see the rest of the draft before passing judgment, but just these three by themselves is indeed underwhelming. 

Yeah each of those guys in isolation I was like "okay yeah fair enough I get it".  But I think you've gotta get at least one college SP in these top 3 picks.  There's usually a bit more supply than demand on HS kids but if you wait til after pick 100 to grab a college arm you're guys with at least one major limitation

7 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

I have a hard time thinking they will take three position players. That said, I do think there's merit to the idea that the Cubs are going to go under-under-under early to save big bucks for someone a bit later. This isn't the first place I've seen that posited. 

I'm okay going under slot for a bat at 23, we just can't keep punting on pitching.  Like I mentioned above if you dont take a college SP with one of those top 3 picks you're probably not getting a really good one.

I think, considering the extra comp pick, we need to leave this draft with 4 pitchers who are unequivocally in our top 30, plus the usual assortment Coppola/Jerzembeck types who have plenty of upside but just as many warts.  And especially if we're cutting a deal at 23 I want something like the 2026 equivalent of Jaxon Wiggins and the 2026 equivalent of Kaleb Wing as part of our haul.  Wings are easy to get in the middle rounds if you've got extra cash to burn but college SPs get picked over fast.

[Outshined_One]

2 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Yeah each of those guys in isolation I was like "okay yeah fair enough I get it".  But I think you've gotta get at least one college SP in these top 3 picks.  There's usually a bit more supply than demand on HS kids but if you wait til after pick 100 to grab a college arm you're guys with at least one major limitation

This sort of stuff goes right to my Board Game Brain sometimes.  If there's one thing you're really, really good at, but you're just sorta meh everywhere else, do you focus on the one thing, or try to build up the other stuff while passing on opportunities that would otherwise be directly up your alley?

Don't get me wrong, I *want* the Cubs to get their act together when it comes to drafting and developing pitching, but the current reality suggests they might be better off taking a bunch of high quality college bats at the top of the draft who could later be traded for major league caliber pitching, because their track record at developing those guys has been pretty good in recent years.

[Bertz]

 

Quote

But part of why high school pitchers are being “de-valued” at the very top of the draft is because the talent pool is suddenly flooded with good ones. The understanding and use of science in training, nutrition, biomechanics, and pitch design has flowed from the highest levels of baseball all the way down to whichever Zoomer is curious and motivated enough to apply it to himself. As a result, there are 16 high school pitchers in this draft to whom I’d be tempted to give $2 million or more to. 

[Jason Ross]

2 minutes ago, Bertz said:

 

Curious that he mentioned $2m for some HS arms. The number "$2m for someone in the fourth round" was something I've seen specifically mentioned as what the Cubs are looking to stash away early. 

 

[Bertz]

8 minutes ago, Outshined_One said:

This sort of stuff goes right to my Board Game Brain sometimes.  If there's one thing you're really, really good at, but you're just sorta meh everywhere else, do you focus on the one thing, or try to build up the other stuff while passing on opportunities that would otherwise be directly up your alley?

Don't get me wrong, I *want* the Cubs to get their act together when it comes to drafting and developing pitching, but the current reality suggests they might be better off taking a bunch of high quality college bats at the top of the draft who could later be traded for major league caliber pitching, because their track record at developing those guys has been pretty good in recent years.

For sure, there's a good chicken/egg type question about the Cubs pitching dev.  I was looking at some of the recent draft classes and the slot values of the pitchers they took and it felt pretty good on a rate/efficiency basis?  But is that a positive sign they should scale that out, or a scary sign that even when being pretty choosy and deliberate with their opportunities they're not completely crushing it?

There's also the Zombro of it all, decent argument that we still don't know, good or bad, how the team is at developing minor league pitching since most guys in the org were acquired and developed either under Breslow or in the Breslow/Zombro interim.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

 

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

Ignore his dumb thumbnail, but Lance's top 3 pitchers are Flora, Peterson, and Rabe. After that is Kuhns, Flukey, and Radel.

Edited 18 hours ago by Tangled Up in Plaid

[CaliforniaRaisin]

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/48771509/2026-mlb-draft-buzz-scouting-reports-intel-analysis
 

The uncertainty of the new CBA/new draft rules are affecting this year’s draft with more teams wanting to load up on prep picks while they still can and more preps not being as hard on their demands because bonus pools might go down in future drafts.

Also bigger college programs are scrambling to offer more NIL to their commits and even juniors to try to get them on/keep them on campus.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

From Kiley: 

[CaliforniaRaisin]

4 hours ago, Jason Ross said:

I have a hard time thinking they will take three position players. That said, I do think there's merit to the idea that the Cubs are going to go under-under-under early to save big bucks for someone a bit later. This isn't the first place I've seen that posited. 

Obviously this strategy worked perfectly last year with the Cubs being able to snag up Wing (4) and Hartshorn (6) but it's risky if the preps you like get gobbled up too early. And especially risky this year if more preps are going to be picked earlier than normal due to the CBA.

[Jason Ross]

41 minutes ago, CaliforniaRaisin said:

Obviously this strategy worked perfectly last year with the Cubs being able to snag up Wing (4) and Hartshorn (6) but it's risky if the preps you like get gobbled up too early. And especially risky this year if more preps are going to be picked earlier than normal due to the CBA.

Certainly risky. In that situation I guess you have to really lean on your pre-draft work; relationships with players/agents, that your pre-draft deals are solid and that you can float kids down. 

I do think that if you go "broad spectrum" and look to sign one of those 16 pitchers who you could throw $2m at and just didn't really give a horsefeathers which lottery ticket you end up with that you probably get one in the 4th. That's be a lot of teams saving a lot of money to detail all 16. But it's probably a bit trickier if you "Vontae Mack no matter what" it about a particular one.

As an aside that's like the third or fourth time this week I made a Draft Day reference (terrible movie, guilty pleasure of mine) and I sincerely want Jed to call someone a "pancake eating mother horsefeathers" come deadline when they trade for a starting pitcher. 

[CaliforniaRaisin]

 

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

Going to ignore the Daniel Jackson noise because I hate it, but Hacopian falling would be amazing 

[Hrubes20]

Does anyone have any statcast stuff on Jackson? That K rate is horrific for the college game, but you could feel a lot better if the exit velos and such were elite.

[Bertz]

9 minutes ago, Hrubes20 said:

Does anyone have any statcast stuff on Jackson? That K rate is horrific for the college game, but you could feel a lot better if the exit velos and such were elite.

Longenhagen has you covered

Quote

Jackson is incredibly twitchy. He has rare athleticism for a catcher and a volcanic muscularity. He's fast, he swings hard, and he really stings the ball when he makes contact, with a 55% hard-hit rate and a 108 mph EV90 in 2026. Whether or not Jackson will hit in pro ball is up for debate. His underclass strikeouts, including on Cape Cod, were out of control, and even as they improved in 2026, he still had some markers of a player whose whiffs are going to be a problem. He doesn't track the baseball especially well because he swings out of his shoes, his bat path is grooved through the middle of the zone, and he has crazy home/road splits, with Jackson whiffing at nearly half the breaking pitches he sees on the road compared to just 25% of them at home. There are plenty of power-over-hit catching prospects who pan out, but Jackson's hit tool risk is greater than most of them.

 

[CaliforniaRaisin]

17 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Longenhagen has you covered

 

Apparently Jackson’s whiffs, chase and EVs line up similarly to Mike Sirota in college.

I’m still too nervous about the swing and miss to want him.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

 

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

3 minutes ago, CaliforniaRaisin said:

Apparently Jackson’s whiffs, chase and EVs line up similarly to Mike Sirota in college.

I’m still too nervous about the swing and miss to want him.

Yeah, there's just no way I'm taking a guy with "out of control " strikeout numbers in the 1st round. Maybe if he was an elite defender, but he's not

[Bertz]

On the one hand the big league team is good, the farm is in pretty good shape, catcher in particular is not a huge org worry in the short or long term, what better time to take a big swing for a potential super-duper star? 

On the other hand I thought Kantrovitz laid out a pretty compelling argument about banking some wins to allow yourself to load up on pitching.  Feels like a guy whose hit tool is this problematic is not setting that floor? 

On yet another hand Mike Zunino had a deceptively good career and that feels like a very attainable bar to clear....so maybe he is high floor?

[CaliforniaRaisin]