Jason Ross

100% agree on almost all of this. And good remembering Ty Johnson; straight up forgot about him! He's having a really good year. I'm hoping that the Cubs can continue to create these pop-up-types. Finding a Ty Johnson, a Tyler Schalffer or a Richard Gallagher every year is found money. Hell, Johnathon Long being a 9th round pick is found money, really.

Image courtesy of © Sam Navarro-Imagn Images The trade deadline is the equalizer in baseball. Regardless of your status—as a team fighting for the playoffs, or a team more excited about draft-positioning—the reality is your team is likely to be active in the leadup to July 31. That's not to say there isn't a side that's more fun to be on, and thankfully for the Chicago Cubs, it seems as though they're likely to be on the right side of things; buying. It means that your season has gone well, and in the Cubs' case, it's gone very well. But no team is perfect. The Cubs are hoping to acquire some pitching and hitting at the deadline. The deadline is a bit bittersweet, as well. While the Cubs may acquire a new front-line starter or a third baseman, it will mean names and players will be headed outside of the organization. For someone who spends as much time on the minor-league side of things as I do, it can be difficult to see some of your passion projects head out for a rental. But c'est la vie. I'd also like to see the team win a World Series. With that said, here are a few names who could end up outside of the organization. This isn't meant as a ranking list, just names I think we should familiarize ourselves with as possibilities to leave, and what they may become down the road. 1. Kevin Alcántara or Owen Caissie: I'm going to cheat right off the bat and say two players for one slot. I think these two are inevitably tied together, in a "one goes, one stays" type of situation. Caissie, for example, was already almost traded for Jesús Luzardo this offseason, so we have precedent for what Caissie is likely to be able to bring back. Either way, when the Cubs make their biggest deadline splash, I would guess one of these two names will be part of that package. There are some who have strong preferences between them, but whichever way that breaks for you, these represent their best prospects I think are likely to move. In terms of their upside, both offer first-division starter upside. Alcántara is a bit of a unicorn, at 6-foot-6 and capable of playing an above-average center field. Caissie, on the other hand, is beginning to flash enough power where you can squint and see 35 or more home runs from his left-handed swing. Both have enough red flags with their swing-and-miss tendencies that both could come up far short. Because both are outfielders (primarily), I do think their fate is tied with one another. I'm prepared to lose one of these in the next 31 days. In fact, I would call it an upset if they didn't. 2. Moisés Ballesteros I don't think it's over 50% that they deal Ballesteros, but I think it's more likely than people might think, as well. The reality on Ballesteros is that his defensive value makes you question what his ceiling is, and how the Cubs view his defensive production and value will factor in. If the Cubs believe Ballesteros can start 75 games (or so) behind the dish at the MLB level, then he's probably too good to trade—barring an elite player with some team control attached. His contact ability, combined with his 20-homer power and approach, could make him a star at the position, even if he's only there half of the time. However, if you're unconvinced of the progress there, and he's likely a DH? Well, that changes the math. I added Ballesteros here because I don't think he's entirely off-limits, if the Cubs question the defense. They called him up when they needed a DH, but found a 40-man spot for Reese McGuire when they needed a catcher. While it doesn't explain their long-term view, it says in the interim, he's not viewed as ready to catch in the big leagues. If the Cubs decide to make a big splash, I do think he could go. (The Twins, for the record, really need a new complementary catcher.) 3. Jonathon Long Long has had a really great year, posting great Statcast data on top of being 23% better than the league average in Iowa. He maintains strong contact ability, big exit velocities, and strong walk totals. However, as a first baseman with power that likely sits between 18-25 home runs, I do question how the Cubs will view him, long-term. It wouldn't be crazy to see him as a good-not-great upside prospect and "found money". Long was just a ninth-round selection in 2023, so getting any value out of him is a win—even if that value comes via trade. Long probably cannot headline the "big" deal, but could headline a smaller one or act as a secondary piece. There's some chance that this one hurts on the back end, if Long lands in a favorable spot and his exit velocities translate. At the same time, Long may never hit for enough power to be a great first baseman or DH. He feels likely to move, with the Cubs already stocked with plenty of bat-first guys. 4. Christian Franklin Much like the aforementioned Long, Franklin is probably a trade candidate due to his roster circumstances. I like Franklin, and have written about him in the past. The Statcast data looks pretty solid, he's got a wonderful plate approach, and he's mostly playable across the outfield. Upside-wise, he could be a second-division starter or a high-level fourth outfielder. But I also think that is exactly why he will be dealt; he's likely to be more valuable to another team, with contention out on the horizon. Again, like Long, Franklin probably is incapable of headlining any trade. He could be coupled with some sort of a low-level lottery ticket. A few years ago, the Cubs traded left-handed reliever Andrew Chafin to the Oakland Athletics in exchange for Daniel Palencia and Greg Deichmann. Deichmann looked like a low-ceiling but high-floor guy in Triple-A, and Palencia was the low-level, high-upside lottery ticket. Franklin and something like JP Wheat could bring back a solid enough reliever on the back end. I would expect that's the kind of move Franklin goes in. 5. Riley Martin No, I will not shut up about this guy. I've talked about him a bunch lately, both in writing here and on the podcast, but I think he's an interesting name to keep in mind in July. At 27 years old, Martin isn't young, but he fits a "late bloomer" mold. He's showing improved strikeout and walk rates in Iowa; he's probably ready for the majors. With the Cubs, he's stuck behind the Caleb Thielbar and Drew Pomeranz lefty combo, but is also probably still behind internal lefties like Jordan Wicks and Luke Little. Martin profiles as a mid-inning reliever, which means his trade value is probably pretty limited. However, I also expect he will be a name most teams will circle as a throw-in. His curveball is great, his fastball shape is solid, and he's basically ready to go. As a third piece in a deal or the guy you swap a rental bench piece for, you can do a lot worse than Riley Martin. The payoff isn't massive, but left-handed arms will always be in demand. I know if I were the Pirates, the A's, the Rockies, he'd be a name I'd try to sneak into a deal. Bonus Name: Jordan Wicks I didn't think he was so certain that I needed to add him to this list, but Wicks feels like a name that's bound to come up. There's draft pedigree behind him, and while his MLB data can look unimpressive at times, he's made some good noise in Iowa recently and the velo has ticked up. Injuries seem to have knocked his value down. Perhaps he can be used in a trade to get a controllable arm back, or maybe the Cubs just don't want to sell at pennies on the dollar. I find Wicks an interesting name to monitor. What do you think, will the Cubs make a big July splash? Who do you think will be traded? Let us know in the comments below. View full article

He's my favorite (and excuse the pun) "big fish" at the deadline. There are more and more things to like. Merrill is my favorite "rental". And I will stump for the next 1-3 years that I really want Jake Bird as a top reliever trade, I am certain.

He is a good hitter.

The baserunning gaffes are getting the attention, but the send for Busch on Kelly's first double and Kelly's second double there are really good baserunning plays.

Not sure what the record for combined pick offs in a game is, but feels like this game wants a run at the record.

Baserunning gaffes are annoying. Scoring three runs at least lets you off the hook a bit. Hopefully just a silly post-game-note of an inning.

How about three?

Someone get Carlos Santana some actual pants. Those are horsefeathers shorts.

I really like Merrill Kelly as a target. One of my favorite stop-gaps for 2025.

Gallen has been horrendous this year and has been worth -.4 fWAR. He has regressed across the board and on velo.

Oh yeah! Holiday is another. Chourio is another. I had mentioned these two in the previous post so I ignored them here. Right now it's more likely for your teams' highly thought of prospect to suck for around 400 PA's than it is for them to be good for the first 400 PA's. We have seen some guys like James Wood crush it right away, but most suck and for extended time. CJ Abrams was horrible for almost 1,000 PAs. But the patience has paid off. And great analog to Colin Rea. You're right on those things. It's more likely that someone like Matt Shaw improves over the next three months than Rea does.

Your words were that the Cubs "appeared to have traded the wrong third baseman". That's teetering on a decision between Cam Smith and Matt Shaw, yes. My advocation was not to make these statements in their career arcs. I'm sorry, but MLB-instant-gratification with prospects is rarely a thing right now. And we have examples of that instant-gratification falling off as well. I didn't say anything about you suggesting a release, I was entirely discussing any Smith/Shaw comparisons. It's silly nonsense. But he isn't. He's three months removed from being a top-30 (if not higher) prospect who has been 40% better than league average at Double-A and Triple-A in the last year. He's not only highly regarded, but highly successful. Context matters, my friend. Secondly, the "exit velocity" stuff is over played. Yes, the EV's aren't great, but I'm sorry, this is what you should expect from a profile of Matt Shaw. He's a high-swing, high-contact type. His EV's are going to be dropped based on the amount of stuff he shouldn't be able to hit. I'm as big of an Owen Caissie guy as there is, but part of his high EV is that when he doesn't get all of it, he gets none of it. When Shaw doesn't get all of it, he gets some of it far more often. I'd like to see more hard contact myself, and better swing choices, but what you haven't likely noticed; he's currently doing that more and more. His hard hit rate has jumped 1.5% since his recall, and over his last 28 swings his hard hit rate is 35.7% yet his wRC+ is 72. We are seeing progress literally right before our eyes but he's not necessarily being rewarded for the process improvement. Shaw is most certainly in a slump, but if we take the data back just 40 PA's ago, he was rocking an xWOBA of .342. Even xData liked the kid prior to a skid. Let's not act like Shaw is some horrible hitter. He's a rookie who's in the throws of making sweeping mechanical and approach based changes against the best pitching in the world. Add in that he won't be able to make these changes at Iowa (140 wRC+ hitters rarely need extra seasoning at Triple-A) and this is what you get. No, I'm sorry, I won't. Gage Workman is three years older, has never played Triple-A, Spring Training data is meaningless and he was so highly thought of that the Detroit Tigers let the world have him. Instead, let's use some other, young, very good prospects as an example: Wyatt Langford (412 PA): 91 wC+ Riley Greene (418 PA): 98 wRC+ CJ Abram (302 PA): 72 wRC+ Andy Pages (181 PA): 98 wRC+ I'm not going to pull every young player, but other such as Geraldo Perdomo, Sal Frelick, and Jonathon Aranda are all figuring it out well into the hundreds of PA's as well. The point is that we shouldn't take Gage Workman as an example, his analogs and pedigrees are no where near Matt Shaw. Instead, we should take recent contemporaries in terms of age, production and ranking and see that even the best prospects are struggling for hundreds of PA's. Keep in mind as well, Kristian Campbell, one of the best prospects in all of baseball is rocking an 87 wRC+ and negative fWAR through 263 PA's. He was routinely graded as a top-10 prospect in the sport. This isn't unique to Shaw. Yes, his defense. Yes, really. First, the "arm strength" argument has kind of been debunked a handful of times. Dansby Swanson, Nico Hoerner and Nick Madrigal have all been + defenders at SS and 3b with the Cubs despite the argument about the arm strength. We can likely backburner that one. In fact, he's been better on balls to his right (taking him away from 1b) than to his left. In terms of OAA, he's sitting on a season -1 rating and a success rate of 68%. This is a 10% increase since his return (where he was at a 58%). There has been measurable defensive improvement for a player who's playing a new position (at least, new as a "primary" spot) before our eyes. Where the ceiling is defensively is kind of hard to gauge, but he's sitting 19th out of 35th in the league right now based on OAA alone and it's safe to assume that with more time (as we have seen) this will improve. DRS has Shaw as a +6 as well. Now, I like OAA in general more than DRS, but there's a pretty decent discrepancy between the two. It's worth noting that, especially when it comes to defensive metrics that, at their best, are wonky and require large samples. Yes. In 2025, Matt Shaw can get to be an average 3b. I'm sorry, all MLB teams have something average, somewhere. Event he Dodgers have a 96 wRC+ from SS, and a 70 wRC+ from LF on the year, and I think, on paper, we all agree they're the best team in baseball who is also chasing a pennant. While I do think the Cubs can upgrade at 3b, many things need to be factored in: 1. What is the cost of acquisition? 2. What is this going to improve? The Cubs more glaring omissions are with impact pitching. Upgrading a win or 1.5 wins over Shaw is likely a decent thing to do! But it's also probably expensive. If internally, Shaw is projected to be average, spending money elsewhere while going with more of a Luis Urias over a Suraez might behoove the team. Ultimately, however, people seem to have a belief that Shaw is just going to be able to go to Iowa and then poof return magically fixed. The Cubs shouldn't give up on him and the answer to "how long should they stick with him?" is likely in the hundreds more than they have. TLDR: Let's have some patience. Comparing him to Gage Workman is silly, the EV thing is a bit played out (and I don't thing representative), there's no answer on who's better Shaw or Smith and while the Cubs should bring in someone at 3b, it doesn't have to be Suarez.

Making any decision based on a few hundred PA's over "who the right third baseman" is or isn't is very premature. I would really caution people from dealing in such a discussion. Rookies take a long time. Based on their first 450 PA's, you'd have concluded Jordan Walker, not Pete Crow-Armstrong was the best young outfielder to come out of the 2020 draft. Today, Jordan Walker has been worth negative career fWAR while Pete Crow-Armstrong is likely among the most coveted young outfielders in the entire game. Things shift greatly with young players. Cam Smith hit a couple of cool home runs and he's had a better than I expected rookie season. Matt Shaw has had a bit of an up and down ride, he's working through learning, certainly. But there's a long way to go before either is the "right" or "wrong" player. It wouldn't be crazy or the most shocking outcome to re-evaluate this next year and see the two flipped. As is, I'm not entirely sure Matt Shaw needs to be replaced as heavily as others do. We have seen recently that young players just, take off. Internally we can look at PCA, Miguel Amaya and Michael Busch. Externally, players like Wyatt Langford, Jackson Chourio, and Jackson Holliday had to struggle for a few hundred PA's (or more) before they got it. He likely needs some competition behind him, but he's not been a blackhole offensively as much as people like to make him out to be. League 3b are hitting at a 96 wRC+ clip and since his return, Shaw is at an 86 wRC+. But he's also been much better with the glove recently. So while he's below average offensively, it's not by leaps and bounds, and with some adjustment it's a pretty decent shot he's average or slightly better at some point.

Oh, yeah, agree. I think it was back in...April or even March...I mentioned him near my top board. I like the skillset. I do wonder if some of the swing and miss question in his game scares the Cubs away; they have tended to shy more contact profile (though aggressive contact). It's why I waffle on Aloy. Do they like some of the contact he's shown and the power and position? Do they go away from a Cape performer? Do they take some of the swing and miss questions? He's an interesting name. Gut says Wood fits a profile the Cubs like, but the injuries are concerning. Gut says they like a Steele Hall (they've been connected each of the last two years to a "Trea Turner" type). Zumach mentioned they really liked Pierce. It'll be interesting to see how they go here.

Oh, I meant #2 as an all encompassing reasoning for not being enamored. Either stuff, projection, injuries...all of it! Mostly, I think if Wood is on the board at #17, regardless of taking him or not, it'll tell us, maybe not exactly how they feel about him, but be very telling. I think it'll be more cut-and-dry than most "passes". And yeah, Nichols would. I usually associate Nichols with pitching, however. At least as of recently, most of the Nichols pulls have come on the mound. But certainly, Aloy would be a possibility. I like Aloy, though I waffle on whether or not he hits the Cubs likes. One day I'll convince myself he fits, and other I wonder if he does.

I'll update this when I have some more concrete information (I know the guy who runs Savermetrics quite well and have asked him to check something for me), but Gage Wood on the surface checks off all of the Cubs boxes. One of the biggest ones we probably haven't talked about is the Ty Nichols factor. To remind anyone who doesn't follow, Nichols is the lead scout in the region. He has had his fingers all over the Jordan Wicks (KSU), Cade Horton (OU) and Jaxon Wiggins (UA) picks. Gage Wood being Arkansas means he's right there under Nichols nose. That likely means: 1. If he's on the board and the Cubs take him, this is another Nichols special. 2. If he's on the board and the Cubs don't take him, either Nichols is less enamored with him, or the Cubs love-love the other guy. Maybe he won't be here, and we won't know at all. But if he is, it's probably very telling with how they handle his presence. My hunch is that based on the BA 5.0 mock where they had the Cubs passing on Wood for Aloy, that they would be wrong in that scenario. I have a feeling that if Wood is on the board at 17, that'll be the dude. Edit: Update on the top; Ty Nichols himself follows Wood's social medias. I'll see if there are any other local crosscheckers and/or scouts. But you can start to figure out Cubs picks through their social follows. That Nichols himself follows Wood, and he's the guy in the region? Keep that name in your pocket.

Swanson has the 15th best fWAR at the SS position in 2025. This is above Bogaerts, Correa and Adames. He has the 9th best xwOBA, suggesting his 18th best wOBA has underperfomed and that he's been unlucky. Beyond that, since signing with the Cubs he's been the 8th best at his position based on fWAR. This is more than Bogaerts, and Correa. He's just one fWAR behind Turner. Swanson's contract is 4 years and $130m less. On the free agent market, wins go for around $8-9m per win. Swanson has 10.8 fWAR. His $177m contract would need around 22 wins to break even at $8m a win, and 19.6 for $9m. Swanson has achieved half in just 2.5 seasons. He is on pace for another three win year. The idea his contract has been anything but "good" is ridiculous. We gotta stop doing this with Dansby Swanson. He's a good player on a contract that is proving to be just fine.

Well, Swanson is under contract for a while. I think the rest many are replaceable. Ballesteros/Caissie/Long are all potential DH's. The Cubs have Jaxon Wiggins, Ben Brown and Cade Horton, all of whom are real potential SP's. Behind them Jordan Wicks. Brandon Birdsell, Javier Assad, Will Sanders could all take #4/#5 roles. Pedro Ramirez could be a 2b option. And that's just internal! The Cubs can likely trade a few of these guys this deadline, still have a decent crop of near-MLB prospects, but will also have lots of money. They have just $50m on the books for the 2027 season. They can, pretty easily, sign Tucker to a $50m AAV and still have $100m+ to spend. They'll replace some outside of the org too.

I am filled with a lot of hope. Most arms in the system have made *some* jump, either velocity wise, stuff wise in general, or command. Considering it's a little different for each arm and not a uniform change, coupled with it being year-1 under Zombro, I suspect a few of these names will grow in the other areas as well. I won't attempt to predict exactly which ones they are, but it's hard to not find a lot of encouragement. Especially if the Cubs go P heavy in the 2025 draft.

Home xFIP: 4.40 Away xFIP: 4.75 He's managed that 2.27 ERA on the road with a K% under 13 with a BABIP against of .230. Severino has been really bad everywhere, but has luck hurting his home-ERA and luck aiding his road-ERA. Regardless, he's just been bad.

I like it when the Cubs score all of the runs.