Jason Ross

Exactly. I use ST as a point of curiosity. "Oh the Cubs are working on this with Player X? Interesting". It's a good window into how the Cubs are looking at a player developmentally, I feel. These changes or fixes aren't things that just happened, they have likely been working on these things for months. Some make big differences, some don't work...but I always find it interesting.

I tend to look at ST as a glorified practice. I'm rarely interested in results - for example, a player hitting well or not does little for me. I'll expand that belief a little if we're looking at a veteran player (IDC at all about their results) versus a young player and give a bit of a look to a younger player, but overall, results don't matter so much. What I do think matters are differences. Does someone show up with a new swing? New mechanics? Is their velocity jumping? Are they flashing a new pitch? These are things that I kind of...jot down and keep an eye on as we move forward. I wouldn't bank on that new skill that they're flashing in a small sample, but it's a noteworthy change and could mean something. For example - Brethowr is showing a far improved swing. That might matter. Mathew Boyd flashed a new slider. That might matter. Many of them may not matter eventually, but it's worth taking note and keeping it in the back of your head.

I think we should probably consider the things that are being traded here in exchange for these players. The Mets already have a pretty full outfield - they have Soto, Nimmo and Siri. They also have Jesse Winker (who's probably more of a DH but can moonlight in the OF). They have Jeff McNeil who can play corner OF. They have Tyrone Taylor and Starling Marte. And to get Canario, they paid cash. If Canario had value in a trade, an OF needy team would have given something up for him. Instead, a team who isn't OF needy on paper traded just cash for him. Probably a good reminder that Canario just isn't viewed very highly in Chicago (they have given him little chance to earn a spot, then they DFA'd him) nor around the league. And likely for cause.

There's been a big swing change. Big. Swing. Change. Give it a few days and there will be something about it on the home page.

My initial thought was "That's Jorge Soler for sure". But considering that I don't think it'd be that easy, I'll go and say that's Junior Lake.

I think we are past Killian as a viable MLB starter territory. He simply cannot induce enough swing and miss at the highest levels to be a starter. He's struggled to develop any sort of whiff or chase pitch. Id assume he spends most of his season as a BP convert where you hope he can run the fastball up to the high 90s and in short spurts can use velocity and continue to develop a 2nd pitch to be used in middle relief.

Id bet that's a MiLB deal and a camp invite. He can provide depth as a worst case rash of injury at the start of the year.

I will always have a weird relationship with the Darvish trade. The timing and the return was rough - it was always going to be a slog to recoup value when you trade for four teenagers. The flip side is that Caissie was someone I really enjoyed as a 2nd round pick in the 2020 draft and was bummed when he ended in SD. Seeing him come back in that trade has always been fun for me. It will probably be a disappointing outcome even if Caissie is pretty good due to the wait time and the other three flaming out nearly instantly. With that said, decent chance the Cubs get a single good player back so it'll be far from horrible.

Yeah good call on the gloves. His swing style looked very Womack-esque but its too old. It's a 90s guy.

Now bully Kyle Tucker into signing a long term contract that starts with a 4. Go get 'em Jed.

+1 to the Tony Womack train.

I think they're being dramatic. Even last year, his value was pretty limited. He was returning from a pretty devastating injury, all while striking out 28% of the time with low contact% numbers in Iowa, undoing the 2022 progress. No one was going to give up much for that. His peak value was in that short time between 2022 and when he got hurt in winter league, but even then the contact% increase was iffy to continue and you'd really want to see it a bit longer than he flashed that skill.

But what role do you think Mike Tauchmann filled? He's a LHH and the Cubs have all three outfielders who hit left handed (Happ hits right handed, also). He's also trending in the wrong direction defensively - he was a negative OAA CF'er last year and is turning 34. So it isn't like he's providing plus defensive ability there. More so, the Cubs barely used him last year once PCA established himself - he played 40 games and have under 80 PA's the second half (compared to over 200 PA's and 60 games, showing that he was not starting often at all in the 2nd half). He had 30 PA's in the entire month of September. It's likely his role on the 2025 Cubs, with an all left handed OF is probably even less. With any injury to PCA, I would also assume that Kevin Alcantara would be next-man-up, not Tauchmann regardless. Two things can be true simultaneously - Mike Tauchmann is a pretty decent fourth OF'er, and the Mike Tauchmann doesn't really fit a role in Chicago with the Cubs. I'd love to get things for people, sure, but sometimes players like Mike Tauchmann leave for free because they don't fill a role. I don't find that a failure on the part of Jed Hoyer. The Cubs CF situation is a bit weird currently - I'd assume Jon Berti and Kyle Tucker will get some time there to spell PCA if Brujan doesn't make the team. But again, they have a top-100 prospect in Kevin Alcantara ready in the wings if need be, so I still think the team is pretty fine there.

How much value do people think Mike Tauchmann or Alexander Canario had? Do we think that Jed Hoyer could have gotten more but just chose to let them go for less? Tauchmann is a fine 4th OFer but one who didn't really fit the Cubs current, left handed heavy, OF. And Alexander Canario is a prospect who is in the very bottom of all Triple-A hitters in contact and whiff rates. I know he had some brief helium two years ago, but I don't think he's set up for success with his current skills and the Cubs letting him go is fine. He has no true path to playing time outside of a pure rash of injuries. If a starter goes down he's behind at least two better prospects. Neither really fit into the Cubs 2025 roster in a neat way (Tauchmann does little to add as a platoon option, Canario could hit LHP but you assume Turner is ahead of him there - and Canario isn't a real CF option) I dont think it's impossible to find faults in Hoyer but neither Tauchmann or Canario feels like a hill, here. I think people are vastly overrating how much value each has in a trade.

From a 100%, purely aesthetic standpoint point...Brethowr looks like Aaron Judge.

He will likely be traded like Arias was for some sort of low compensation (cash/PTBNL). I doubt many teams put much value in Canario as a trade target, and the Cubs seemingly haven't put much effort into forcing a spot for him either, so this feels like a fairly likely outcome. As for the bench, I would assume Workman has the inside track considering he's a "keep him or lose him" type. He's also LHH which gives the Cubs a different look. Brujan is probably his biggest competition and probably has a good chance to beat him out if the Cubs are not cool with a Berti/Tucker CF backup situation.

This felt pretty likely. The Cubs never seemed to overly love Canario and couldn't figure out what to do with him. For his sake I hope someone like the A's or the White Sox or another OF'er needy team grabs him.

That's really interesting from an evaluation standpoint. Publicly accessed models such as DRS and OAA certainly paint him as far from radioactive in the field. He doesn't get great OAA range rates, but seems to make up for it with his arm. I'd assume the Cubs have different defensive weights that look more heavily at his range? On one hand you'd want to question their modeling - but the Cubs have had a real importance on analytics (moving their scouting closer to data than human) and they've made defense an important cog in their play style over the last few years - so you also have some "appeal to authority". At this point I'm just spitballing and their evaluation being so different from DRS/OAA is something that seems intriguing.

I think it's less the actual, worldly consequences and more comes down to Tom's vanity. He's always come off as someone who cares a decent amount how he's perceived. He's made sure to hide behind others when things go wrong. He's made sure we all sympathize with his biblical losses. He hides from negative consequences at Cubs Con. I do wonder if public pressure, if every major reporter calling him cheap will eat at him. It really may not. I don't know Tom. But he certainly gives off some vibes that he cares how people view him which can you give you small hope that public pressure may do something.

I almost think making the playoffs might help push it. "You made it because of Tucker and you let him walk" will only intensify the cheapness.

I do wonder if this pressure will help the Cubs as an organization decide to push a little extra for Tucker. Ricketts has seemed pretty steadfast in how the Cubs have operated in terms of money, but he's also proven more than once that he's vain when it comes to how he's perceived in the media. He's made sure to skip events like Cubs Convention when the Cubs aren't good, the way Hoyer felt the need to have to thank him for his financial contributions makes me feel like he really enjoys the public praise, as well. Enough pressure from Rosenthal, Olney, Passan and crew on the media side could help here. I think worse case, it can only help in that front. (Note - Not saying he'd fully open the pocket books, but Ricketts does come off as someone who cares how he looks)

Speaking of projections, ZiPS has Turner as a 112 wrC+ hitter and worth 1.0 fWAR. Conversely they have Grichuk as a 95 wRC+ and a 0.0 fWAR valuation.

Part of the problem here is in roster fit. Randall Grichuk doesn't really fulfill a need. He does hit lefties well, but looking at his profile he does nothing that Seiya Suzuki will (probably) be asked to do. For example, Grichuk has been a pretty bad center fielder as of late - and as he hits his mid-30's, this feels like it checks out more and more. He's a -16 DRS over his last 1600 innings in CF. So he's mostly confined to RF and LF - which Suzuki could play. As well, he's been pretty bad against RHP most years. Yes, he did have a 115 wRC+ last year, but this feels like an outlier. His SLG was way up against RHP . years prior he had wRC+ of 88 (2023), 62 (2022), and an 82 (2021). Justin Turner does something the Cubs dont have - they don't have anyone who hits right handed and plays 1b. You could say Tucker could swing into 1b (he's had nominal playing time there since 2019) and he's good against LHP, but for pitchers who have splits, it's sometimes good to have the RHH 1b option as well. Turner's old, and we shouldn't count on him to be amazing, but he's off a season with a 117 wRC+ and while you can argue Grichuk is better against LHP very effectively, Turner is likely going to have more opportunity and is a better roster fit because he's still more than capable against RHP. Grichuk will probably be a pumpkin there. Turner also has little competition as a RHH 1b - there isn't even a prospect that fulfills that role. Kevin Alcantara or Alexander Canario (though I have reservations on both for different reasons) could realistically be a RHH OF'er sometime during 2025 - the Cubs don't have that at 1b outside of maybe popup prospect Johnny Long. Owen Caissie hits LHH and would probably need some RHH protection at the very least. In that regards, we should look at fWAR in less of a pedantic way. Since fWAR is a cumulative statistic, one in which usage matters, the Cubs probably have more use for Turner. Turner can play DH and 1b, and will play more, giving him more of ability to accrue fWAR with the Cubs. It may be that Grichuk ends up posting better WAR numbers, but how the Arizona Diamondbacks can find time for him will differ from the Cubs and with bench players, their usage and utility matters. The Cubs likely believe they will get more milage out of Turner, and while there's risk employing a 40 year old bat-first player, I'm not that disinclined to see their reasoning for a 1b/DH over the corner OF'er.

Then you release him. He's on a one year, $6m deal and the Cubs are under the LT still by leaps and bounds.

In terms of playing time, I'm assuming that the goal is to have Turner get around 250 PA's or a bit less. He got 114 PA's against LHP last year and that's probably going to be on the high end of how many he picks up in Chicago. I don't think the Cubs envision him picking up more than 150, against RHP on the year. He probably will not be used as a primary starting player, regardless of any single injury - it would probably require more of a rash of injuries for him to get that kind of action. Instead, I suspect he'll be used more as a RHH to fill in at 1b/DH against tough lefties and to spell someone in the lineup from time to time.