Jason Ross

Who's ever said "every single of one Cousell or any managers' decisions are the correct one"? I certainly haven't. I think Craig Counsell is right far more often than Cub's social media and anyone who thinks other wise is living in fantasy land. A manager isn't going to bat 1.000, but let's again go back to the initial premise here: his decision today to keep his elite defensive SS in the game when his second highest GB% is on the mound isn't a bad one as you made it out to be. It's a perfectly defensible one. Maybe Swanson makes an error today, or goes 0-for as well! It doesn't change that with the information Craig had at the start, it's a perfectly fine choice. Much like if you put you life's savings on a bet with poor odds and actually won, it doesn't mean that at the decision point you made a statistically sound choice.

As someone who has seen every corner of Cubs' fans on social media platforms (reddit, facebook comments. X/Twitter, Bluesky) there are tons of situations where the majority of Cubs' fans aren't anywhere close to the right answer. There is a reason the Chicago Cubs don't crowd source decisions.

You're the one bitching about Craig Counsell like he's the idiot for not considering who's pitching. Stop digging a hole. What you really want is just to see Pedro Ramirez. I get it. So just say that. Your "justification" for it is silly, dude. You can just say what you really mean. "I want to see Pedro Ramirez". I, too, would like to see Pedro Ramirez in a Cub uniform. I also understand pulling Swanson when your ground ball pitcher is on the mound might not be the best choice. Here was Craig Counsell's quote. "Maybe a different look in the lineup. Maybe a day off". Let's see...is the lineup order different? Yep! Is someone getting a day off? Yep! So what did he say that he didn't do? And yes. Everything is statistics when it comes to baseball; sorry, it is. There is a reason team's don't hire random fans to run horsefeathers and instead hire people with analytical backgrounds. Because "being bold for a couple of games to shake things up" isn't a real thing. Fans think it is, but that's not how it works. Colin Rea gives up a lot of ground balls. "Being bold" doesn't change that, for example. Players are more or less likely to do things. Can low-chance outcomes happen? Yeah, they happen all the time! But that's not "bold" that's "going against the grain". Think of it this way: if you're running out of money, you could "be bold for a few days" and gamble all of your money on lottery tickets. Statistics say "you're probably not going to win" (there's odds on the back of the scratchers...or...statistics). Maybe you'll be the lucky winner; someone will be! But it doesn't change the idea that statistics are real, and that "being bold" in the face of statistics, or ignoring that the odds aren't still there - reality still exists. So, again, just say what you really mean: "As a fan, I'd like to see Pedro Ramirez".

I addressed that in the post. So to recap your plan: 1. When your 2nd highest GB% pitcher on the roster is on the mound weaken your defense both at SS and 2b by taking out the 6th best defensive SS in baseball and shift over your starting 2b 2. To make way for a rookie with zero PA's ever in the MLB Don't act like this is some genius plan. You're actively making the team worse defensively for a big "who knows?" offensively. This isn't on "Craig Counsell is a big dummy". This is "I want to see the new shiny toy". So just say that. Don't act like the smart baseball guy is all of a sudden incompetent. Just say "Man, as a fan, it'd be fun to get to see Pedro Ramirez". I'd respect that; that's a totally normal thing. What I cannot stand is when you act like this is some oversight on Craig's end. It's not.

Pedro Ramirez isn't a shortstop. Not to mention Colin Rea throws 50% ground balls, so if you mean "move Hoerner to SS and pull your +4 OAA SS for a rookie" that seems not like the ideal situation to do that. This is a day in which you'd prefer an elite defensive INF. Maybe if Shota was on the mound this would work. But he isn't. But yeah, Counsell is the issue. 🙄

Not entirely shocked. Pedro Ramirez is a switch hitter who really doesn't hit LHP that great. He loses a lot of power against them. So while he can soak up the positions Shaw did, he isn't a 1:1 for him in the lineup. Alcantara can crush LHP. So I think there's some fit and finish here that makes sense. The Cubs have made it clear over the years that unless there is a major swing change needed they work with their young players through struggles at the MLB level. As fans clamored for PCA, Busch and Shaw to get demoted they almost always kept them around. I wouldn't expect them to demote Ballesteros through a struggle unless it's as major as the original Shaw swing change.

Image courtesy of © Mark J. Rebilas-Imagn Images On Friday afternoon, the Chicago Cubs called up infielder Pedro Ramirez to the major league roster, rewarding the youngster's breakout season. Ramirez has enjoyed one of the best starts to the system of any Cub, regardless of level, and now he'll take his talents to the North Side. But what are the Cubs getting in their newest addition? Pedro Ramirez Strengths The first thing that stands out for Pedro Ramirez is his contact rates. His "worst" strikeout rate was 17.1% and came in his first real taste of Myrtle Beach. Since then, he's hovered in the 15-16% range regardless of where he hit; this is a massive green flag for the infielder. What's even better is that despite Ramirez clearly adding more pop to his game in 2026 (he's already set a career high for home runs through May), he's done so while maintaining a really excellent 16.3 K%. More home runs and all the same contact ability are a great start. Another positive is that Ramirez has some excellent batted ball data. He's on the small side; however, he maintains some strong exit velocity data as he sits around the 75th (or better) percentile for things such as his exit velocity and max-EV. Even his barrel rate and pull-air% are strong for a hitter who swings more than average, as many times, players who tend to make a lot of contact and swing a lot have a tendency to make more weak contact. As it pertains to pitch-level data, Ramirez has excelled at hitting many different types of pitches, none more so than his ability to mash fastballs on the season. He has just a 10.9 whiff% on the pitch to go along with a .377 wOBA. Because he's a switch-hitter, he's capable of taking away pitchers' offerings that would normally neutralize a hitter who can only hit from one side of the plate. We can see this in how much damage he's done on sinkers and sliders; both pitches he's currently got a wOBA over .400 against. He has very few pitch-level weaknesses currently, giving him a more rounded approach at the plate. While Ramirez is a switch-hitter, it's his left-handed swing that carries the day. When facing righties, Ramirez shows off much more pop in his bat. He's just more athletic from the left side and is able to hit the ball better. This isn't anything that is special about the infielder, as most hitters have a "better" side (i.e., Ian Happ is much better left-handed than right-handed most years). While the right-handed swing is fine, it's his ability to hit RHP that will likely be the carrying factor. Defensively, Ramirez won a minor league gold glove as a third baseman last season and has been showing some versatility lately as the Iowa Cubs have given him some work in the outfield. It's unlikely he's a capable shortstop, but second, third, left, and right field all seem on the table, giving him solid versatility and multiple pathways into being a successful MLB player. Pedro Ramirez Weaknesses Pedro Ramirez is a bit of a free swinger, and will likely face some "hyper-aggressive" adjustments not dissimilar to issues Matt Shaw and Moises Ballesteros have faced upon their callups. Ramirez has a tendency to chase pitches while still making a lot of contact, and MLB pitchers are far more capable of attacking this weakness than Triple-A arms. It shouldn't surprise anyone if he "gets himself out" on some weak ground balls for a while as he learns "just because I can hit it doesn't mean I should". If there's one pitch he's seemingly struggled on this year, it's the sweeper. He has his lowest batting average (.182) and wOBA (.301) on this offering. He tends to expand the most on sweepers (with an o-swing% over 30%) and his highest whiff% on the year. No one is perfect, but this seems like a pitch potential veterans may look to exploit more. As noted earlier, Ramirez tends to struggle more with his right-handed swing. He doesn't hit the ball nearly as hard, doesn't pull the ball nearly as much, and doesn't appear to have the natural feel for it. The positive is that he makes up for a lack of power with a lot of contact and a bit better zone-awareness, but continuing to refine his right-handed swing would make him go from promising to downright dangerous. Ramirez's Fit With Cubs Pedro Ramirez is being called up to take Matt Shaw's position for the time being, though his fit will be a little different. Swinging better from the left side means that he won't so easily fit Shaw's best offensive aspect, his ability to hit left-handed pitchers, but will provide much of the same versatility in defensive positions and base running that will be lost. This is an exciting call-up and one that probably wasn't on many people's radar a few months ago, but it's well deserved. Ramirez has hit at every single level he's been at and been young for his competition, and we all (myself included) have likely slept on him. With him breaking out due to his increase in home runs, he's gone from a prospect who was likely slept on to someone who looks like he could be a true MLB regular, and it will be exciting to see him get his first taste of the Show this weekend in Wrigley. View full article

This adds some context but probably still isn't a great representation. Many data points don't hit "stabilizing" (aka taking out just dumb, random luck) until you get to 50, 100, or even more PAs. Truly, 30 PAs just isn't enough for these data sets to matter outside of curiosities. So much so, I wouldn't even really factor them into discussing player value.

I literally posted data showing them being unlucky. Both a tweet from someone and then fact checking it, showing the Cubs wOBA on solid contact balls in the air is a full .100 points lower than league average, despite hitting a lot of them. That's bad luck. It's baseball, luck is apart of the game, but it doesn't make it untrue. If you'd like to provide any data for why the Cubs offense *isn't* as good as we think, be my guest. I'm also more than willing to point out luck in the other direction. Right now, the offense isn't bad. It's snakebitten. It's okay to admit bad luck is real, just like good luck is real. Example: two 10 game winning streaks amist all of the injuries was good luck.

Not to mention, these numbers are not predictive. Last year Ian Happ hit better with runners on and better yet with runners in scoring position than he did bases empty. Same in 2024. No-context statistics lists like this breed anger for no reason other than to rage bait and create content interaction on social media.

Just to add context, while the Cubs had a .523 wOBA on balls hit 90+ MPH on line drives and fly balls over the last three weeks, that's fifth worst in baseball and league average on those is .100 points higher. They've been decidedly unlucky in this fashion.

Correct, but here's the thing: Suzuki isn't going to be the only injury the Cubs are going to suffer between today and the end of the year on the position player side. Shaw will take a decent amount of PA's, if not the bulk of the PA's (infield) when that happens. So sure, if no one gets hurt he will average 1.5 PA's or whatever, but we know that won't happen.