craig

Would be really fun if Yander Maria worked out.

Thanks for shared thoughts, Bertz and others. Why I love discussion boards.

Thanks for observations on Mathis. That would be fun if he turns out to be a true-blue hitter.

Interesting reference to "big boy power". Did you see that in some camp TV AB's? I saw a handful, mostly driving balls through the infield type stuff, don't think I saw anything that got as deep as where a normal outfielder would play. I thought he looked kinda small, didn't look very physical. (Obviously guys can add strength after age 21, but he may just be a slender physique always...). More than Madrigal power, but may be that 1908's 12-17 HR's projection may be more generous than conservative?

Yeah, how fun would that be if Wiggins turned out to be really good. yeah, I'd assume Lumpuy for Myrtle. See what he can do.

Is Brody McCollough injured as usual?

Yeah, will be interesting to see if the Cubs can develop some of the younger guys into meaningful prospects. We could become a bottom-5 farm very quickly, perhaps. Would really love to hit on a couple of guys. With Moises soon to graduate, would love to see somebody from the Latin kids emerge as a significant prospect. And from the high-school draft picks.

I like that Cole Mathis was listed. If he's healthy enough to already be in a game, that speaks well to his post-surgery recovery. Nice, nice, nice!!!

That's a great observation, Bertz. I wonder if that might not depend a little bit about the caliber of that last bench guy? Vasquez was an auto-out, .083 average, K'd half his AB. We've had some really bad bench production. OBP's Vasquez-Wisdom-Mervis-Madrigal-Mastrobuoni .143-.237-.148-.280-.245 OBP. Some really easy-out bench guys to start with, and then when injury necessitates calling up somebody who's even worse like Vasquez, no surprise that a manager trying to win games doesn't play them much. I'm kinda hoping that this year the bench depth will be of a higher caliber, and maybe the last guy can still give competitive AB's and have anti-awful OBP/OPS? Whether that be guys at start of season, or injury-necessitated callups? What if Workman is able to keep his OBP up over .310 and his OPS up near .700? Brujan is a career .531 OPS, .622 last year. Even that worthlessness is still better than Madrigal/Mastrobuoni/Vasquez, and maybe he's ready to step it up a little bit, and be a >.650-OPS type guy? Wouldn't it be nice if, when they do need to call somebody up, Alcantara/Caissie/Cowles/Triantos/Moises are ready to give competitive big-league AB, and look variably anti-awful maybe-even-good if/when needed? Obviously guys can look great in Mesa, getting lots of AB's, and facing mostly minor-league pitchers. Maybe Workman will get blown away by major-league pitchers in 50-degree Wrigley, when he's not getting many AB, and when life without a hit in the last week (or more) is messing with his head. Brujan might be just another Madrigal. Alcantara might make Wisdom look like a contact-hitter. But man, given how many PA usually end up going to non-starters, it could make a huge impact on the offense if non-starters aren't auto-outs. Hoping hoping hoping.

You're a believer! Hopefully his 3.65 xFIP over 26 innings while making adjustments, hopefully those adjustments lock in and make him a good pitcher now and in future. Four pathways possible: He makes it and he's good. He makes it and he's bad. He gets sent down. You're a believer: If he's as good as you think, and obviously a big-league worthy guy, he should dominate in AAA. If so, he'll be back soon enough. He gets send down. But doesn't really do that well. To me the question isn't really where he starts. It's whether he's actually good. If he's good, he'll be with the Cubs either all year or most of it. That would be great. I hope so. I just hope he's made some adjustments that make him into a sustainably good pitcher who will help the Cubs.

You're a believer and think he's earned a big-league spot? I'm kinda agnostic. I'd love to have him emerge as a good big-league reliever. But, kinda feel like that's up to him to prove it? He's got a clear opportunity to win a spot this camp. But not sure I'd just tenure him a roster spot based on past history, if he doesn't kinda win it in camp? He's been a career 4.75-ERA guy, with a kinda bad fastball, high HR rate, and pedestrian K-rate, in past. I hope he's a new and better man, 100% healthy, and that health and "Cubs infrastructure" will get more out of him future than he's produced past. Would **love** to have him look sharp in camp, look like he's a better pitcher than he was, have him win a job, have him emerged as a good reliever, and have him be good for years of club control. That would be wonderful. But if he doesn't sparkle in camp, I'm fine to option him; give him another chance to prove he's improved and to earn a shot back. First three X games underwhelming, 1K and 1.8 WHIP. No sparkle yet. With Assad out, two spots between Wicks, Brown, Miller, Pearson, Keegan, and non-roster guys. Not the most imposing competition, so Pearson may JAG his way to roster even without looking good in camp. Keller has opt out, Keegan and Miller no options. If for hypothetical example Keller looks better than Pearson in camp, I'd have no problem keeping Keller and optioning Pearson. If Pearson is improved and is ready to be a good major leaguer, he'll get his chance soon enough.

Not sure I'm tracking? I don't think Pearson will be considered by the Cubs for rotation. Unless he unexpectedly shows something unexpectedly interesting in that role at Iowa. But from a developmental standpoint, if he's going to Iowa anyway, why would having him start versus relieve at Iowa be really stupid, or hurt him developmentally? I'd think racking up more innings might be good for him developmentally, and give him more opportunities to practice whatever pitches or grips he's trying to optimize. And if he's extended so that he could be a long 3-inning guy on occasion, and have no problem handling 2 inning outings, why would that be so stupid?

Allen, thanks for your charts, helpful. Any info on Brody McCullough, who you have deep on your AA rotation? Drafted 3 years ago, turns 25 in June. but has mostly been injured and has only 108 pro innings. Did we ever get info on what his injuries actually were? Any guess if he'll be healthy enough to pitch? I'm wondering if he's a guy who, *IF* he's healthy enough to pitch, will get another shot at rotation? Or if he's maybe too old and injured for rotation development, and might just be a bullpen piece?

"Young star" is Cubs-fan hyperbole. The main concern isn't "a place for him". It's improving as a hitter. Will he be able to hit or slug? He's hit 14-13-15 HR's the last three years. Big-league pitchers are better. He's got a bunch of getting-better to do if he hopes to be a big-leaguer. Would be super beautiful if could show improvement. As with Caissie and Triantos and Moises, this will be his first chance to repeat a level. Can he improve himself enough so that he can do better at this repeat-level? Can he improve himself so that he'll be ready for the majors in 2026? Beats me. Your chance to show it, Kevin! I hope you can! The author wants the Cubs to know if he's ready for a starting job next season. It would be super cool if he was; I think being ready to be a utility outfielder would be OK.

I figure anybody who has some noteworthy tool is worth keeping an eye on until they fail and prove they can't do it. So for sure, I'll keep an eye on. Really long shot, though. Swing seems so long, Going to strike out a lot, hard to imagine making enough good contact often enough to make it work. But maybe he'll surprise.

Agree. He's .385 career BABIP in minors. .375 and .405 these last two seasons. https://www.milb.com/player/owen-caissie-683357

yeah, I agree Tom. This is always the thing with prospects. Yes, we know what they did last year, and before. But will they get better, and if so by how much, and how quickly? I never know in advance. That's why I'm so curious to see what this year will mean for Caissie. I often kinda like it when a guy finally repeats a level. When it's the same level, you can easily see if he's improved or not. Caissie's goign to have the shot to prove that 2025 Caissie is better than 2024 Caissie. A note on batting average: every HR is a hit. Caissie's had some uncommonly good BABIP's in past. All quality of hard contract? Or some luck? I don't know. One of the best ways to get around the "could be luck" factor is to just bash more HR's. Which tends to help walk-rates, too. Not sure if it's possible, we'll see. But seems to me the most straightforward way for Caissie to strengthen his average, his slugging, his walk-rate, his OBP, his prospect status, everything offense, is to be able to whack more balls over the fence. For a 500-PA guy, an extra 10 HR's is worth 100 OPS points. 20 points in batting average/OBP, 80 points in slugging. Caissie hit 19 HR last year, would like him on pace to hit 30 this season. Ideally without wrecking his K-rate or walk rate or BABIP rates.

Pretty enthusiastic about the stuff. Not sure the Cubs pitching infrastructure has facilitated much improvement in wildman issues. But man would it be nice if Wiggins could sharpen it up and have the major-league control required to get success out of his stuff. Given our slender volume of rotation guys with ceiling, man would it be impactful to beat the odds and get lucky with Wiggins. Perhaps a year further removed from TJ, perhaps he'll take a step (or three) in improving his control.

Fascinated to see how he does this year. Not super confident, given the K's and the contact challenges. But I sometimes when guys are constantly promoted, I think repeating a level can be a really good thing. Opportunity to step forward. Opportunity to show he's better now than last year. Did he learn some things and make some adjustments last year? Perhaps they'll click and further lock in this year, and the power and pull and lift will become more consistent, and the slumps will be briefer. Like a lot of power guys, he needs to get to the power. If your prospect status depends on power, you want to hit a lot of HR's. Will he hit enough? No idea. But there's a chance, and *IF* he can show that he's taken another step forward, and can emerge as a probably solid starting player, or platoon guy, that would be really nice. Tucker will probably be a one-and-done; if so, Caissie might have a window of opportunity. And if Tucker gets extended, but Caissie does have an impressive season, his trade value might jump, and perhaps he could be the lead piece for a quality player. Just hoping to see the HR levels and HR/K ratio improve significantly, and have him look like he's ready to be a good starting big-leaguer.

I think any decent infielder should be able to transition to 1B rather well. If he is short, there will be intrinsic wingspan factor to his disadvantage. But yeah, other qualities may outweigh the wingspan bit. Shaw is only two inches taller than Moises. I think he's much more likely to play decent big-league 1B than Moises. Of course I may be wrong! It's just a discussion board, I'm sure I've got all kinds of dumb ideas or expectations. But yeah, I think any decent infielder could transition to 1B and be variably good/decent. Infielders like Solano and Shaw have range. They've handled hot shots at 3b, hot shots to 1B shouldn't be that different. They have manifested lateral range at 3B and SS, and Solano at 2B. I expect they'll have lateral range on grounders at 1B just like that did at other infield spots. Shaw is suggested to have good and quick footwork at 3B; that should translate nicely to 1B if needed. I hope you guys are right. That Moises is so quick and athletic that he'll handle hot shots at 1b well; that he'll handle hard grounders well, just like he digs sliders and breaking balls in the dirt at catcher; and that his lateral range will as good as for Solano and Shaw, and it will all be no problem. I guess I'm just kinda nervous that even if he trims stomach weight, that his build with his haunches just really isn't equipped for the lateral range that good infielders have. Cubs haven't played him at all at 3B or 2B or SS, the way Shaw and Solano have been used, so I'm kinda guessing they don't really think he has the lateral range that most infielders have. But maybe he does, and he'll be just fine at 1B. Hope so. But yeah, just like I have no evidence that he can't play decent 1B, I suspect there is presently lack of evidence that he can.

Thanks for discussion. No, zero evidence that 5'8" is a prohibitive problem. Your Solano example logically demonstrates the contrary. To flip the question, do we have any evidence that Moises can play a good big-league 1B? I do think height is a factor for 1B. But yeah, maybe not that much. Neither Solano nor Moises have the have the wingspan that longer guys have. So it seems self-evident that there will be some line drives they won't be able to snag, and some errant throws that they won't be able to reach while keeping toe on the bag. But, Solano the 2B/SS/3B is probably ranging and snagging some ground balls that tall 1B's like Fred McGriff or Matt Mervis weren't getting. So, some pros and cons. The height thing is just one of multiple factors, and not intrinsically prohibitive, as you exemplify with Solano.

Point taken that present roster lacks an obvious (or good-defense) backup 1B. For now I think it's unlikely that Moises would be the first choice if Busch gets injured, but it's not impossible, and the choice now might change come July. Happ is short, 6'0". Berti and Shaw are shorter, 5'10"; Moises is shorter yet. None of has played hardly any 1B. If Busch is out, I'm guessing we're dropping from top to bottom quartile defensively at 1B. Yes, there are a couple of short 1B who get used, and are decent. Moises might be a unicorn and be decent there, despite both his short wingspan and his unique physique. No harm in no-evidence wishing for a unicorn. But I don't see any reason to expect it's likely. Guess I'm just kinda resisting the mindset that 1B-defense doesn't matter. Or that any good hitter who's inept at other positions, you can just move him to 1B and he'll be fine. Imagine the following extreme hypothetical outcomes, and their relative probability for Moises. Primary catcher. Defense develops into good enough (and bat). Primary 1B. Defense becomes good enough (and bat). Primary DH. Bat, including HR power, becomes good enough to support this role. #2 catcher. Defense good enough for 30-60 starts (and bat). Starting catchers rarely start 120 games, so #2 catches a lot of games. #2 1B. Barring injury, starting 1B rarely site more than 15 games. So a #2 1B Lesser role. 4A guy, maybe? Back/bubble of the roster guy? Part-time DH/PH/3rd-string-C/3rd-string-1b type guy? Primary-anything: DH >> C >>> 1B. (Odds of having good enough defense/per-position-bat combo at 1B least probable. ) Adding enough effective-HR-power to be a good primary DH is more likely than odds of making it as a primary C or 1B. Fielding/hitting well enough to be #2 catcher is more likely than primary anything. Good #1 catchers are hard to find. #2 catchers always short on either defense or offense, yet they still typically start ≥40 games a year. If Moises hits pretty well, that may justify being a 30th-percentile defender. As you mentioned, 1908, the prospect of being #2 catcher (start 30-60 games), sub-average but not--awful at 1B (start 15 games), and bunchof-starts DH, even if not majority, games) and 45(C) + 15(1B) + 50(DH) = 110 starts. I think that's the path I most hope for. I guess I kinda think that improving into #2 catcher or a primary DH are really the two realistic pathways to making it as an asset. If he picks up an occasional game at 1B, that's nice. But a backup 1B with no other position, he's a heavy-usage DH or he's not a thing. In terms of short-term opportunity, Seiya is DH when Seiya, Happ, and Tucker are healthy. *IF* any of those three, or Busch, go IL, that would open 1B/DH. Perhaps Moises would be next man up. Or perhaps not, maybe we sign Bregman and Shaw would be ahead of Moises for that, or Caissie, or some vet. But yeah, *IF* Moises can explode into the best bat available; and *if* Shaw not Bregman is playing 3b; then it only takes one injury to any of Busch-Seiya-Happ-Tucker to open up a 1B/DH opportunity for somebody.

Complex prospect. Hard to guess how he'll progress, or how he'll fit in majors. Some thoughts. 1908, part of your thought process is that his bat is too far ahead of his defense. How good his catching could become is iffy in the first place, even if he could fully optimize it. But you kinda argue that he'll never be able to fully optimize it because his bat will put him in the majors before he ever gets the opportunity to optimize his defense. There is definitely merit to that argument. I admit I do wonder how quickly his bat actually will force him up? Will he be THAT good that he needs to be up as a bat-only pinch-hitter/DH? You mention that he projects more as a 20-HR guy than a true HR guy. Suzuki is the DH. He's got 2 years of contract. If Ballesteros is a 20-HR type upside guy, I don't really see that being a guy who will push Seiya off of DH for the next two seasons. And if he's just coming up as a pinch-hitter 3rd-string catcher, I'm not sure they'll use Moises on the big-league roster all that much over the next two years. Thus, I'm thinking he might spend most of the next two years in the minors, with two years of opportunity to advance his catching defense (and optimize his physique). Do I assume that will optimize his defense to be able to play big-league catcher? I have no idea. My sense is that he may be sub-average at every feature (receiving, blocking, throwing, framing.). No report I've seen has ever suggested that he's average or better at ANY aspect of big-league catching. But, as you say, catching is a skill that can improve with time and effort and good coaching. I don't know how far that improvement will ever go. But *IF* he gets most of the next two years to work on it, I think we'll have a better idea whether it's hopeless or whether he's become OK/not-bad. So, I guess I'm hypothesizing that his current bat isn't so compellingly good-and-powerful that his callup is too imminent to allow two more years of defensive development. Like I say, no idea whether 2, 5, or 10 years of defensive development will ever get him far enough to be big-league playable. Don't know, but I hope so for sure! Don't know how good his offense will become. A guy who hits .270 with 20 HR and some walks, that's kinda like 2024 bellinger. I don't think that's a guy who's a compelling, big-ticket DH. By contrast, if you hit as well as Seiya, .848 OPS, that's a really valuable DH. .281 average, 21 HR, he was still really valuable. And Pete Alonso, he's been ≥34 HR every year. He just got a big deal. My ramble is that there's a continuum of offensive production, and of HR-power. Where Moises ends up may impact whether he's a big-asset high-value guy even as DH-only, versus decent/good big-league hitter if he had a position, but as a DH-only not that valuable. A DH-bench guy kinda needs to have some positions, if he's not a compelling most-days DH. I've mentioned this before, but I'm really hesitant to assume that Moises at 5'9" or whatever, with no wingspan and no defensive range, could be better than pretty awful at 1B, one of the most important defensive positions in mlb. (1b's handle tons of challenging ground balls, with difficult throws to moving-target pitchers trying to cover the bag; handle tons of erratic pickoff throws; handle so many throws from 2B/SS/3B, many of which VERY hard to handle. Very important defenisve position.). Assuming that Ballesteros will be anti-awful at 1B is an iffy assumption. Thinking that he'd actually be average or better at 1B is probably harder to imagine for 1B than for C. Defensively, the difference between being 2nd versus 3rd catcher is huge. Few catchers catch 120 games, so there are a bunch of opportunities for 2nd catcher. But 3rd catcher, especially if he's 3rd catcher because he's liability? That's not really much of a thing, unless you're primary DH. Heh, too long! Summary: 1. He should get another couple of years of opportunity to improve as catcher. 2. I doubt he's ever going to get used much at 1B, for defensive reasons. 3. I doubt is bat is currently so awesome that he's going to be called up as a full-time DH for Cubs soon. 4. If he can't catch, and can't 1B, he needs to be REALLY good hitter, with more than 20 HR-power, to be a big-asset DH. 5. **Lots** of value for a 50-start backup catcher, who can hit, DH, and play an occasional game as a bad 1B.

Thanks much. So, about $67K plus Games. Yeah, the Games factor adds an unknown, no idea. To me Games + $67 doesn't seem like a huge shortfall. Don't imagine you can pick that up for nothing. But I'm guessing there probably is a team that hasn't spent out, and that it wouldn't take a major talent sacrifice to trade for what's needed. Or, maybe it's tough break, and Martinez just gets to choose. Settle for $700 or $750 or whatever is left post-Games, even if it's less than the reported $900. Or, maybe keep the reported $900 arrangement, but need to wait till next January. Or maybe Cubs/Martinez just accept that it didn't work out this year, that's business, and both sides go back into next year with a clean slate and no commitments to each other.

Totally agree for draft. Not seeing manifestation yet for international infielders. That's where I'm wanting to see things get way better. Sure hoping it's the "takes time", and that's about to kick in. I'm with Tom, want to get some hits from within the Yahil Melendez, Fernando Cruz, Derniche Valdez, Angel Cepeda, Adan Sanchez*, Ronny Cruz, Robin Ortiz, Juan Tomas, Juan Cabada, Wilfry De La Cruz, Cesar Lugo, Edgardo De Leon, Eli Lovich, Ty Southisene crop. (I know some of those were drafted, but I'm just copying Tom's good list of teenage position guys. We need to get some hits out of that bunch, particularly the international guys.).