Cubs Winter Top Prospects Rankings: #6 Jordan Wicks

I just noticed you tweeted from Aram in this piece. Cool! He does work for us on Twins Daily and Brewer Fanatic, expect to see him produce some Cubs videos in the near future.

1 minute ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

I just noticed you tweeted from Aram in this piece. Cool! He does work for us on Twins Daily and Brewer Fanatic, expect to see him produce some Cubs videos in the near future.

Huge Aram Leighton fan. Please give him some ups from me if you get the chance. He's been a must follow for me on twitter for a bit.

1 minute ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Huge Aram Leighton fan. Please give him some ups from me if you get the chance. He's been a must follow for me on twitter for a bit.

Will do, I've been meaning to check in with him anyway!

Wicks is my foundation piece for the rotation at the moment. I don't mean I think of him as a 1 or a 2, but, coming into this season, I had serious questions about the rotation depth and concerns about what the rotation would look like in 2024 if Stro and Hendricks opted out. Wicks helped put a lot of that to rest for me, and it didn't feel like this was a flash in the pan or overachiever guy. It felt more like the Cubs found a guy who could anchor the middle of the rotation, give you good innings, and do it on a rookie deal. Hence, foundation piece.

It's a large part of the reason I don't want them trading Wicks this offseason; it would open a hole to close another. I will grant that there is quality depth in the system and solid options in FA and the trade market, but I would rather deal a guy like Brown or Farris, even if they have higher upsides, simply because Wicks proved he belongs as a starter in the majors.

1 minute ago, Outshined_One said:

Wicks is my foundation piece for the rotation at the moment. I don't mean I think of him as a 1 or a 2, but, coming into this season, I had serious questions about the rotation depth and concerns about what the rotation would look like in 2024 if Stro and Hendricks opted out. Wicks helped put a lot of that to rest for me, and it didn't feel like this was a flash in the pan or overachiever guy. It felt more like the Cubs found a guy who could anchor the middle of the rotation, give you good innings, and do it on a rookie deal. Hence, foundation piece.

It's a large part of the reason I don't want them trading Wicks this offseason; it would open a hole to close another. I will grant that there is quality depth in the system and solid options in FA and the trade market, but I would rather deal a guy like Brown or Farris, even if they have higher upsides, simply because Wicks proved he belongs as a starter in the majors.

Yeah, I waver myself on how I feel about trading or not trading Wicks. I had brought this up in the forums in response to someone, and it's why I can't tell where I sit (and am thankful this isn't a question being asked of me), but that I think it's a lot easier today to want to trade Ben Brown over Jordan Wicks for much of what you said. The reality is, Jordan Wicks is far more likely to impact the 2024 Cubs than Ben Brown. The "wavering" is that on November 20th, 2024, we could be singing a very different tune. If Ben Brown gets his fastball under control Brown's going to be the better pitcher. If Jordan Wicks can't get the whiffs he needs, he could be a relatively uninteresting pitcher. 

I say this as a pretty big Jordan Wicks fan. I think the best version of Jordan Wicks is a "Kyle Hendricks-Lite" type of a groundball heavy change up master who FIP-beats his way to mid-rotation value. But I also know that Brown's upside is much higher, and Wicks could settle in as a low-whiff #5. 

48 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

The reality is, Jordan Wicks is far more likely to impact the 2024 Cubs than Ben Brown. The "wavering" is that on November 20th, 2024, we could be singing a very different tune.

The thing is, we don't even have to just look forward.  As recently as August 1st or so I think general consensus was Brown >> Wicks.

The thing that concerns me about Wicks is the complete lack of swing and miss after his debut.  He ran an 11.6% rate from that point on, which is approaching position players pitching levels of contact.  And if you look at his Stuff+ numbers, they're pretty abysmal, which would back up those contact rates.  There's an important caveat to that last point that public Stuff+ numbers are laughably bad at handling changeups, but even still there's a good chance that he's just forever going to be well below average on the K front. 

The number of guys who are good pitchers with a sub 20% K rate and sub 50% GB rate is very small.  It's possible, but it's a tightrope walk.  Miles Mikolas is probably the reasonable best case scenario (i.e. we're not ascribing soft contact superpowers to him) and look at how inconsistent his career has been.

I have huge confidence this guy won’t be traded and is ranked too low. If you’ve read enough baseball prospect content on it’s way towards the mainstream and even general sports content it becomes apparent that stuff like durability, health, aptitude, and basically anything that isn’t bang zoom pow zow is crazy underrated/valued 

I’m not sure what more we could want out of a pitching prospect: completely healthy, no doubts about role, relatively extensive background, command, control, variety, growth potential, plug and play, intense, very caught up with tech and lingo etc etc

Delivery reminds me a lot of Andy Pettitte 

15 minutes ago, Bertz said:

The thing is, we don't even have to just look forward.  As recently as August 1st or so I think general consensus was Brown >> Wicks.

When we say “general consensus” is this a Cubs Twitter/X prospect meta thing or like…industry? That difference is key, not sure the industry is as quick to put a 24 YO TJ’d 7th year pro in front of a 2nd year lefty first round pick over something as common as a little more velo in return for more BBs, injury risk, injury history, fewer innings etc 

Are we sure sure that a guy who ran like a 30% K rate in the minors with 2-3 brand new pitches is going to have bat missing issues in the long run? Or that Stuff+ is particularly predictive at this stage?  

10 minutes ago, Bertz said:

The thing is, we don't even have to just look forward.  As recently as August 1st or so I think general consensus was Brown >> Wicks.

The thing that concerns me about Wicks is the complete lack of swing and miss after his debut.  He ran an 11.6% rate from that point on, which is approaching position players pitching levels of contact.  And if you look at his Stuff+ numbers, they're pretty abysmal, which would back up those contact rates.  There's an important caveat to that last point that public Stuff+ numbers are laughably bad at handling changeups, but even still there's a good chance that he's just forever going to be well below average on the K front. 

The number of guys who are good pitchers with a sub 20% K rate and sub 50% GB rate is very small.  It's possible, but it's a tightrope walk.  Miles Mikolas is probably the reasonable best case scenario (i.e. we're not ascribing soft contact superpowers to him) and look at how inconsistent his career has been.

Now, everything we're talking about Savant data wise, we have to plug in the "...it was a small sample size" asterisk, so keep that in mind with everything after this but what interests me in his savant data is that the whiff% was small, but the chase rate was not. So hitters are willing to offer at his pitches that aren't in the zone. He does a pretty solid job of getting the curveball on that outter corner, opposite of his changeup which he runs in on RHP. I wonder if the Cubs add more curveballs to the mix; it was his second highest whifif% pitch and it has pretty good vertical movement. He throws so many fastballs in on the hands, and changeups in on the knees that developing that pitch that goes where those pitches don't could be something the Cubs could use to unlock a few more swings and misses. 

Adding to that, he used the curveball generally when ahead in the count, with two strikes. So I think Wicks knows it's a strikeout pitch for him. He goes to fastball-changeup, almost exclusively when he's behind, but ahead, it's more curveball. Getting a few more curveballs, even in early counts, might be a good way to then use that changeup to generate better action later, too.

6 minutes ago, 1908_Cubs said:

Now, everything we're talking about Savant data wise, we have to plug in the "...it was a small sample size" asterisk, so keep that in mind with everything after this but what interests me in his savant data is that the whiff% was small, but the chase rate was not. So hitters are willing to offer at his pitches that aren't in the zone. He does a pretty solid job of getting the curveball on that outter corner, opposite of his changeup which he runs in on RHP. I wonder if the Cubs add more curveballs to the mix; it was his second highest whifif% pitch and it has pretty good vertical movement. He throws so many fastballs in on the hands, and changeups in on the knees that developing that pitch that goes where those pitches don't could be something the Cubs could use to unlock a few more swings and misses. 

Yeah the groundballs and hopefully soft contact should hopefully stick around and mitigate some of this.  There might be a bit of natural regression too.  His contact rates against were 81.2% after his debut, there are several guys who ran season-long contact rates right in that range and had K-rates in the 20-22% neighborhood.  That's still below average but not scary below average.  

9 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

When we say “general consensus” is this a Cubs Twitter/X prospect meta thing or like…industry? That difference is key

Are we *sure* sure that a guy who ran like a 30% K rate in the minors with 2-3 brand new pitches is going to have bat missing issues? Or that Stuff+ is particularly predictive at this stage?  

MLB Pipeline, who last updated their stuff in early August, have Ben Brown at #5 in the system and #86 in the industry, while Wicks is #10 in the system and not in the top 100.  I don't do Baseball America anymore but pretty sure I remember them being similar.

And Stuff+ is very much designed to work well in small samples.  35 innings is not actually that small a sample for these metrics.

2 minutes ago, Bertz said:

Yeah the groundballs and hopefully soft contact should hopefully stick around and mitigate some of this.  There might be a bit of natural regression too.  His contact rates against were 81.2% after his debut, there are several guys who ran season-long contact rates right in that range and had K-rates in the 20-22% neighborhood.  That's still below average but not scary below average.  

MLB Pipeline, who last updated their stuff in early August, have Ben Brown at #5 in the system and #86 in the industry, while Wicks is #10 in the system and not in the top 100.  I don't do Baseball America anymore but pretty sure I remember them being similar.

And Stuff+ is very much designed to work well in small samples.  35 innings is not actually that small a sample for these metrics.

Yeah, I think we'll just have to expect that the K rates will be on the lower side. I'm okay with that if he can be someone who gets 47% ground ball rates, keeps the baseball in the ballpark, and doesn't walk hitters. His strikeout rate can't be scary bad, but if he can sit in the 7's per 9, even the low 7's, you've probably got a pretty useful FIP-beater.

50 minutes ago, Bertz said:

MLB Pipeline, who last updated their stuff in early August, have Ben Brown at #5 in the system and #86 in the industry, while Wicks is #10 in the system and not in the top 100.  I don't do Baseball America anymore but pretty sure I remember them being similar.

And Stuff+ is very much designed to work well in small samples.  35 innings is not actually that small a sample for these metrics.

Small samples + a ML debut though? This is the same stat that had Cubs fans echoing that Wesneski was an immediate impact 2-3 starter off his debut when a wider lens said be careful. I can’t say I’m so familiar but seems like what the youth would call “sus” particulary when used to replace a variety and years of data including the entire MiLB (edit: and NCAA)

Bah these pop rankings! I had no idea! It does fit with this more sensational era of prospecting, Brown’s not exactly bad so much as way more and even increasingly pre-injured 

53 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

I’m not sure what more we could want out of a pitching prospect: completely healthy, no doubts about role, relatively extensive background, command, control, variety, growth potential, plug and play, intense, very caught up with tech and lingo etc etc

We don't always agree, but I think this is bang on with Wicks. He ticks the major boxes you want from an upper level pitching prospect. Granted, he could end up as a 5th starter/swing type in the long run, but those guys can have long careers and be useful contributors for a major league team. He might not have ace upside, but if he can throw 170+ innings, put up solid BB/9 and HR/9 numbers, and post a decent K/9 while under team control, that should be good for 2-3 WAR and free up resources for the team to pursue Ohtani and Soto.

I get that it's a floor vs ceiling debate with Wicks vs Brown/Farris, and I usually skew in favor of ceiling (hence why I have Horton over Wicks), but (1] I think there's another gear Wicks could reach in terms of the mental aspect of the game (sequencing, deception, etc.) that could elevate his production; and (2) the Cubs hot-shotted his callup out of desperation and he didn't crap the bed.

3 minutes ago, Outshined_One said:

We don't always agree, but I think this is bang on with Wicks. He ticks the major boxes you want from an upper level pitching prospect. Granted, he could end up as a 5th starter/swing type in the long run, but those guys can have long careers and be useful contributors for a major league team. He might not have ace upside, but if he can throw 170+ innings, put up solid BB/9 and HR/9 numbers, and post a decent K/9 while under team control, that should be good for 2-3 WAR and free up resources for the team to pursue Ohtani and Soto.

I get that it's a floor vs ceiling debate with Wicks vs Brown/Farris, and I usually skew in favor of ceiling (hence why I have Horton over Wicks), but (1] I think there's another gear Wicks could reach in terms of the mental aspect of the game (sequencing, deception, etc.) that could elevate his production; and (2) the Cubs hot-shotted his callup out of desperation and he didn't crap the bed.

I agree with both of you. It's hard to measure pitchability - and Wicks has that. His changeup is devastating. It's an out pitch and doesn't really rely on movement per say. Having Hendricks on the team is going to be great for him. They are very similar pitchers.

Wicks is an important variable.  He's got a chance to be a solid-average starter, and we know how expensive solid-average can be.  Will be interesting to see how he gets used, and how he progresses.  I'm very optimistic, although perhaps a bit more cautious than the consensus here.  Some of the questions/variables:

1. HR's.  No problem; better-than-leave average; or variably above-average HR-rates?  
2. Growth potential.  Tom sees growth potential guy, and mentions "2-3 new pitches".  Often smart control guys are best able to tweak up stuff to optimize their pitch mix.   How much improvement is ahead and how good will Tom's "2-3 new pitches" get?  Will any become elite?  Velocity improvement seems unlikely at this point.
3. Swing-and-miss.  Or will his swing-and-miss and K-rate be just fine?  Or is he going to need to make it as a contact guy?  
4. Scouting.  If change remains signature pitch, will scouting enable hitters to lay off?  
5. Consistency:  He can win when he's locating the change, the fastball, and the curve.  How consistently can he do that, versus having off days when the change isn't exceptional, or fastball location isn't sharp, or the curve is hanging or missing?  And how resourceful are his workarounds when one of his pitches isn't sharp?  
6. Fatigue:  He's been on 7- and 6-day rotations in college and minors.  How will his stuff hold up in a 5-day rotation?  1908 mentioned he was fatigued and ineffective in his last starts.  When he'd been on a 5-or-6 day rotation for one month, and was clearing 110 well-rested innings on the season.  *IF* he's asked to work 5-day rotation for 6 months, and to clear 140 innings, will he get fatigued and lose some effectiveness?  

Quote

Velocity improvement seems unlikely at this point.

Why? 

12 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Why? 

I don't see it, in fairness. It'd be one thing if he had TJS two to three years ago and he was building up arm strength and stamina, but I think we're seeing close to the finished product with Wicks. He doesn't look like the type who needs to fill out, either.

Granted, I could see him adding a tick to his fastball, but I think doing so wouldn't be that beneficial to him when so much of his repertoire relies on movement and sequencing. If he could consistently maintain 92-94 and keep his movement through 6+ IP, then great, but I think it's more likely we see him mess around with different kinds of fastballs and change ups to offer different looks the second and third time through the order than we see him focusing on throwing harder.

The Cubs have laid out how they develop pitchers.  You work on velo, then you work on movement, then you work on command.  That's the progression, in that order, under the Breslow school of pitcher dev.  There's no way Wicks hasn't picked up a set of weighted balls prior to his 3rd offseason in the org.  And at 24 and already pretty strong I don't think changes to conditioning are going to magically unlock another gear like they did for e.g. Assad.

It'd be awesome, but unlike someone like Ferris It'd be foolish to assume it's coming.

Yeah, I'm a real Wicks-stan and I don't see it. There's not much projection with the body. There's been nothing really over 2 years that suggests there's more velocity coming here. I think we have to accept Wicks is going to sit in this range of 91-94mph with his fastball. And that's okay, you can be that kind of a guy and be useful. But I think velocity wise, this is it with Wicks.

If there's going to be progression it's likely pitch mix (more curveballs!) and continuing to refine mechanics and command.

1 hour ago, Outshined_One said:

I don't see it, in fairness. It'd be one thing if he had TJS two to three years ago and he was building up arm strength and stamina, but I think we're seeing close to the finished product with Wicks. He doesn't look like the type who needs to fill out, either.

Granted, I could see him adding a tick to his fastball, but I think doing so wouldn't be that beneficial to him when so much of his repertoire relies on movement and sequencing. If he could consistently maintain 92-94 and keep his movement through 6+ IP, then great, but I think it's more likely we see him mess around with different kinds of fastballs and change ups to offer different looks the second and third time through the order than we see him focusing on throwing harder.

Hard disagree on all of this

- The idea that an injured arm going through rehab and recovery - considering nothing else - has an straighter path to making real gains than a healthy arm makes no intuitive sense. Improved mechanics, strength, health, and stamina are not off the table for a healthy and highly skilled arm like Wicks, all can contribute to improved velo 

- Every hurler, let alone someone who can actually pitch like Wicks, would benefit from increased velo. His command and control with a variety of pitches demonstrated over longer periods of time than peers only makes it *more* likely that velocity is functional and productive (think Cole Hamels, James Shields, Andy Pettitte)

- “Filling out” is probably not what we seem to think it is, certainly being a healthy 6’3” 200+ won’t work against him gaining velo. Just intuitively we should be able to see how a healthy, successful professional athlete with that kind of a size working out regularly for the sole purpose of performing a scheduled task is going to be composed differently over years and better positioned than the often more injured and less skilled field to improve after his debut rather than immediately hit a wall or decline 

- At this point it feels we’ve heard it a quadrillion times: orgs are very good at coaching up velo. Cubs are even at least arguably seen as ascending in this area with one of the harder throwing MiLB orgs

- No one’s coming up a 6+ inning guy. Probably his best shot at being one of those guys is getting to 94 

Wicks is my #1 prospect in the org just as much for what he can be, an org drafted rotation anchor in the mold of guys like Pettitte and Hamels, as what he is (a plug and play functional SP with playoff potential). There’s alot of tools, great health, outstanding aptitude, command, pitchability, and really we’ve already seen him flex a power game btw NCAA and MiLB when you dive into the numbers like those impressive HR/FB and K rates in Iowa and/or the low minors, @ KSU. He’s a good one, lotta things are possible here. Rebuild 2.0 is so very different from 1.0

1 hour ago, Bertz said:

The Cubs have laid out how they develop pitchers.  You work on velo, then you work on movement, then you work on command.  That's the progression, in that order, under the Breslow school of pitcher dev.  There's no way Wicks hasn't picked up a set of weighted balls prior to his 3rd offseason in the org.  And at 24 and already pretty strong I don't think changes to conditioning are going to magically unlock another gear like they did for e.g. Assad.

Assad's velo jump came over a half decade after joining the org. Are we to assume he didn't pick up any weights or weighted ball in his career before the pandemic or age 23?

Assad is much more what I'm talking about for Wicks than against. He's really only had one "bad" pro season in his life (2021), with strong seasons from 18-21 before the pandemic. He stayed healthy, kept working, got stronger, and went from somebody maybe only I noticed once in a while to actual prospect to MLer. Wicks can and maybe even is not unlikely to have a similar kind of progression over time

Also I have to say that I've never heard of such plan? I've listened to Breslow on Cubs pitching and the lab and it didn't sound like they took some linear approach (he said outright command has never improved in the lab while velo and shape routinely do) at all so much as velo and movement can be coached up much more readily than something as nebulous as command so it'll naturally come "last" for greener arms newer to the position like a Kohl Franklin.

Most guys do it sooner. He had access to top-level equipment and pitch-lab resources in college, even before access to what the Cubs have, and he was probably smart enough and motivated to get the most out of them.  Optimizing velocity is Breslow's early stage goal, so I assume they've done most of what they could.  Wicks' will turn 25 this season.  For most guys, going from 7- or 6-day rotation to 5-day rotation doesn't normally increase velocity.  

So yeah, I'm guessing that if there was more velocity to be had, they'd have found it before now.  Probably.

But each guy is his own development project.  Perhaps as a fast-track college 1st-rounder, the early priority for Wicks was on changing all of his pitch shapes (other than the change)?  Maybe velocity optimization really hasn't been a priority, so only now is he giving primary attention to trying to eek out another 1-2 mph?  

7 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

Assad's velo jump came over a half decade after joining the org. Are we to assume he didn't pick up any weights or weighted ball in his career before the pandemic if not after?

Assad is much more what I'm talking about for Wicks than against. He's really only had one "bad" pro season in his life (2021), with strong seasons from 18-21 before the pandemic. He stayed healthy, kept working, got stronger, and went from somebody maybe only I noticed once in a while to actual prospect to MLer. Wicks is that but a larger scale

 

Assad was chubby and added velo when he got into better shape.  Jordan Wicks is already in great shape and thus doesn't have that sort of low hanging fruit available to him.

Just now, Bertz said:

Assad was chubby and added velo when he got into better shape.  Jordan Wicks is already in great shape and thus doesn't have that sort of low hanging fruit available to him.

That....no. Assad was a professional athlete for a half decade before he just flipped the switch and started working out? No

11 minutes ago, TomtheBombadil said:

That....no. Assad was a professional athlete for a half decade before he just flipped the switch and started working out? No

Ah yes.  The minor leagues, particularly under the old salary structure from the last CBA, were famous for everyone uniformly having optimal nutrition and conditioning.