Jason Ross

Not King, but Nick Pivetta. His contract will pay him out only $4m in 2025. That's not differed money, literally, his salary+signing bonus in 2025 is $4m. There's more money on the back end if he opts in, but he's basically free next year for SD in a cash-flow perspective.

In his defense, I'd be shocked, too. Not because I don't think the Cubs have a legit chance (there's enough smoke out there that makes you believe they could be the likely destination ultimately) but because I wouldn't have guessed the Cubs would have ever had a chance on him at this stage with how they do FA.

He's only making $4m. I would guess this means they will definitely trade a SP though. And this is their way of getting him into their current budget.

Well now that's interesting. With King being less expensive than Cease, this feels even more unlikely that King is moved. And more likely that Cease is moved.

While possible, it feels unlikely that any of those names are truly on the cutting block outside of like, Thompson and Merryweather who feel like 40-man casualties on their own. The Cubs have made a habit all offseason of collecting any pitcher they can as if they were pokemon in the name of added depth. I'm not married to any single name on that list, but a few of them (Thompson and Merryweather) probably aren't enough to get under the LT enough to where the Cubs are under the LT and can make a move later on their own. Rea, Morgan, Braiser were all acquired recently - while they *could* trade them, it feels...more like fanfic than something they'll actually do. That leaves Jameson Taillon, a durable and reliable (if not particularly exciting) SP with a rotation of guys I'm not sure you really want to super count on right off the bat (be it that they have tweaks to likely show or overcoming injury, or, both). He has a limited NTC and with 2 years left, is probably more likely to be picky on the move than less. All the while. Assad and Brown are already down on the injury report. I don't want to entirely discount it - if you want to get creative, you could do these. But the Cubs just don't feel like a team in a position to really explore that - whether we like it or not. I don't want to give the Cubs a pass here for continued behavior of using the LT like the Boogeyman (it's nonsense and shouldn't be a thing). But I also think living in a reality where Tom owns the Cubs, that the Cubs will continue to use it as an excuse and that's just something we have to factor in here.

Maddie Lee reports the Cubs are "evaluating" whether Canario can handle 1b currently. Which sounds like a very cheap, internal 1b option....in the case that the Cubs don't really have much money to get someone else. *cough* Bregman *cough*.

Yep! I just think that the way this goes is basically, two pronged at this stage: 1. The Cubs sign Bregman, and likely, pretty quickly move Hoerner for prospects. They bring in a pretty cheap 1b who is RHH, and offseason is done. 2. The Cubs miss on Bregman. They sign a better bench player (Canha or Turner). They add a RP like Robertson or Finnegan as well.

I think we have to expect that any Nico Hoerner trade in the interim is going to return prospects. I'd love for the Cubs to sign Alex Bregman, keep Nico or trade him for a SP immediately...but it seems as neither are in the cards. The Cubs seemingly want to be under the LT - meaning money has to clear. And I just don't see a Nico for SP swap currently as one that happens (maybe it does! but it's hard to find that move). There have been enough minor reports out there that the Cubs would likely look to deal Hoerner and Trueblood suggested it was for prospects, that I think that's the most likely outcome. I'll say this - I'm okay with this scenario assuming the Cubs get back acceptable prospect value from Hoerner (and I'll assume they will - Hoyer trades are rarely terrible). It would give the Cubs a bit extra ceiling, as I think Bregman's best 2025 is better than that of Hoerner's best 2025, while also allowing the Cubs to remain nimble enough to trade for their biggest need at the deadline - be that a SP, a RP, or to replace an injury. As much as I think the Cubs could use a SP, if Jordan Wicks' breaking balls progress, or Brandon Birdsell grabs a spot, or if Ben Brown is rockin' and rolling....there's a world where a SP isn't needed. These prospects would help pay for that other option, or a SP or whatever. I'd love for the Cubs to just snap out of it and go ham, but I just don't think that's going to happen. But I also think a Bregman signing and a Hoerner trade can remain as a viable outcome for a good season, so accepting the reality we live in, I think it's a positive outcome.

Entirely. Saving a bit more because you're really expecting to add some impact at the deadline is fine for me. We don't need to spend for spending sake. At the same time, eschewing signing any help with the idea of "save it all for later!" misses the mark as well. Find a middle ground. It doesn't have to be Justin Turner (though I think he solves a needed role of a RHH who you can count on to hit LHP on the bench) or Kyle Finnegan or any particular name - but if the Cubs don't sign Bregman than they should make one or two moves with the $30m as well - unless they really want to push their luck on a pre-November contract extension for Kyle Tucker that for accounting purposes starts in 2025 as opposed to 2026.

Just to add to how difficult to impossible the team would find it to spend that much money - all of the LT money they would add would be partial LT money - meaning that a $20m contract would count as far less - probably under $10m on the 2025 LT with two months to go. The likelihood that the Cubs gut the system enough to add in three impact players like that under the LT in July is...very, very, very small.

Currently, the Cubs have around $30m under the LT. Now, the Cubs may sign Bregman, which makes this entire thing moot - they probably won't sign Turner in that case, so let's assume that the Cubs don't sign Bregman, but do sign Turner. At this stage, it's likely Turner will make >$10m this year - not only has he not signed, he's 40 now. The market just isn't there. So the difference in LT money remaining is $30m in the event they didn't sign Turner after missing on Bregman, and $20m (or more) would be the remainder if they did. So here's the question: what exactly do you think the Cubs would be able to do in the first scenario mid-season that they can't in the second?

I know that everyone has some concerns about backup 1b currently, but I am going to assume that the Cubs are less worried than we are with a Caissie/Ballesteros situation arising than many here are, and the thing I'll point to is Michael Busch. When the Cubs traded for Busch, it was pretty clear that he wasn't really going to supplant Hoerner at 2b, and he probably wasn't up to snuff for 3b. We all agreed - 1b was his best home. One thing I didn't see people pointing out last year, is that through his MiLB career, Busch had started just 17 games at 1b. By the end of the year, he was among the better defensive 1b in baseball. That doesn't mean to say that Owen Caissie or Moises Ballesteros will take to it like a fish in water, either, but that I do run a bit less worried about either of those guys getting the spot. Both handle positions in which you can't have stone hands - RF and C. That isn't saying I wouldn't welcome a Justin Turner type either - I think, more importantly than simply playing 1b, he does something the team doesn't really have a lot of: RHH with power. Kevin Alcantara or Alexander Canario might fit that void, but I for one really question Canario's hit tool and if it's MLB capable, and the other still probably needs to be in Triple-A over being a bench player. Turner could help fill that role. On the bench in general - I think we have to remember "this is a benefit of having a bunch of top-100 types this close to the MLB:". Any 3+ week injury can be covered with a top-100 type outside of maybe shortstop...but I kind of think the Cubs plan there is Matt Shaw (and then allowing Berti or Triantos to fill in the created gap) if they were to deal Hoerner. Even as is, with Hoerner coming off an arm surgery, I'm not sure how capable he is to handle a more demanding arm position like SS in the event of a May injury to Swanson. But realistically, the bench probably stays "the bench" on any longer term spot. It's why I kind of settle on "get me one more guy", particularly a RHH with some power, to fill it up. And even in the event of a Hoerner trade, I'll probably be pretty okay with the group.

Very small follower count and no one reputable. I'd say it's nothing but your typical clout chaser.

Buster Onley says it's between the Cubs, Tigers and Red Sox and a decision will happen "soon". If those are the finalists, I would guess he's coming here. If he wanted to sign in Detroit, he probably would have by now. I'd guess they have the most guaranteed money on the table but have yet to meet the years or AAV in some way. They feel like they have to give him more or less exactly what he wants there or he won't sign. Just my read. Boston vs Chicago is a bit of a tossup because I'm guessing Breslow is going to the Hoyer school of "creative contract" here. But the Cubs have a more direct path to the playoffs and his buddies are here.

The creative, opt out laden 4 year type of a deal.

Bummer. ST is "best shape of their life" season and was really hoping he was a bit better then that. Alas, I'm still here for Big Mo.

To add to the discussion, just look at how the Cubs have handled the left side of the infield over the last few years. Nico Hoerner, Nick Madrigal and Christpher Morel have played real innings on that side. The first two don't look like typical SS/3b - they have weak arms and Madrigal needs a step stool to reach the top shelf of things. Conversely, Morel looks like an athletic freak and has a big arm to boot. Yet the Cubs turned the first two into plus defenders while Morel is DH quality in the field. This is clearly just an anecdote - Moises Ballesteros isn't playing 3b and that story isn't to say "put everyone everywhere and just go for it!". But the reason I bring it up is that looks can be deceiving and writing Big Mo off of 1b because he's a bit different probably isn't the way I'd go with it.

The Cubs acquired Owen Caissie a main piece in the Yu Darvish trade in what feels like ages ago. In reality, the big-bodied outfielder still hasn't seen his 23rd birthday and has rocketed through the system. On the doorstep of making his MLB debut, what will 2025 bring for the Canadian? Image courtesy of Mark J. Rebilas-USA TODAY Sports Today we continue our review of the Top 20 Chicago Cubs prospects (as voted on by the readers of NSBB). At number 3 we find a powerful Canadian outfielder who is on the cusp of the big leagues. Before you read about Owen Caissie, don't miss our previous Top 20 Cubs Prospect articles including our look at some honorable mentions, the Cubs' Top Prospects #20-16 and the Top Prospects #15-11. #20 - Pedro Ramirez, INF #19 - Luis Vazquez, INF #18 - Michael Arias, RP #17 - Alfonsin Rosario - OF #16 - Drew Gray, SP #15 - Jonathon Long, 1B #14 - Fernando Cruz, SS #13 - Derniche Valdez, SS #12 - Alexander Canario, OF #11 - Cristian Hernandez, SS #10 - Brandon Birdsell, SP #9 - Jaxon Wiggins, SP #8 - Jefferson Rojas #7 - James Triantos #6 - Cam Smith #5 - Kevin Alcantara, OF #4 - Moises Ballesteros, C/1B/DH #3 - Owen Caissie, OF 2024 Season Review - Owen Caissie - RF/1B/DH Owen Caissie had a season that we can effectively split in two, and both showed some positives and some negatives. Caissie, who earned a promotion to Triple-A Iowa at the start of the 2024 season, had displayed improved contact rates Double-A by the end of the 2023 season. That trend seemingly continued at the start of his new campaign, While not an eye-popping number, the slugger hovered around the 27% K% range for much of the first half of the 2024 season. For someone who will walk a lot, and should provide power, these numbers fall into the "not great, but passable" range. At the same time, his contact rates were in the low 70's, which were slightly below league average, but fit into that same "passable" category. However, when looking at his power numbers, both the raw counting numbers and rate stats, they fell short of expectations. As always, it is important to put things into some context. Caissie was much younger than the International League's average, starting his season at the ripe age of 21. Regardless, fans expected more than a .443 Slugging Percentage and an Isolated Power of .164. He hit just eight home runs through his first 76 games. One thing Caissie has always needed to work more on was pulling the ball more, and gaining more lift. But remember, this is a tale of two seasons... After the MiLB all-star break, a new Owen Caissie came to play, this time, he showed off a much improved power approach. Over his last 51 games, Caissie managed to hit 11 home runs, increased his ISO to .240, and his SLG ballooned to .516. He accomplished this in two ways - first, he greatly improved his pull rate, and secondly, greatly improved his lift - two things we've really been waiting for him to do. This is a clear approach and swing difference and it paid off in the power department. Sure, we wish it was all roses and peaches, but that isn't realistic. Player development is rarely linear. Caissie struggled a bit more in the second half of the season. First, he had an increase in strike outs. Over the last 51 games his K% crept over the 29% range and was over 30% his final 33 games. Those rates are similar to what we saw in his younger days. Secondly, his contact rate dropped into the mid 60's, which is a 4% reduction. Clearly his new damage approach came coupled with an addition of the strikeouts and less contact. The hope is that as the approach matures further that these lesson again, but it is also probably noteworthy that when you sell out for power and damage, these are usually apart of the territory. Defensively, there was more real progress made in his ability in the outfield. Reports on his routes and athleticism in RF make it more and more likely that in the interim, he's a capable outfield he can limit advancing runners even though he's never going to be the most fleet-of-foot. Season Outlook and Scouting Report - ETA: Summer 2025 If you've been paying attention to prospect rankings, you'd be remiss if you didn't notice his name sliding down them a bit. There has been more and one evaluator who has pointed out that the power production hasn't matched the body type yet, and the hit-tool is never going to wow anyone from a contact point of view., I'd caution you to pause on worrying about them, because I think there's equal parts prospect fatigue and underlying things that make these a bit unfair. The big-bodied outfielder has been around a handful of years and has always remained very underage for his level, being among the absolute youngest hitters wherever he's gone. This will obviously add context at times to his numbers; being as large as Caissie makes you forget that he's so young for his level and learning how to harness that can take time. It creates a bit of a fatigue as his time in the minors wears on a bit - he's no longer new and shiny and especially being so young, it means he's needed more time than say, Matt Shaw. But that doesn't mean progress isn't evident and we saw that with his approach and swing changes in the second half. In a vacuum, Owen Caissie represents a different breed of prospect than the Cubs have had in a while - someone who falls more into the "masher" mold than the others. He's power over hit, and with that strikeouts will happen. Despite those things, the left handed hitter has not shown concerns in being a platoon-type, and has made progress defensively. I don't see a simple DH or first base only type here (at least in the interim, let's call it, the next two to five years). I'd like to (and expect him) to see some time at 1b with the loss of Matt Mervis, as any Busch injury will almost require either one of Caissie or Ballesteros to be called up and thrust into duty. With the additional pull rates, and added power, I'd be careful if I was sitting under the screen in right field...and watch out for ricochets ser. His legitimate 60 grade arm will help there as well, a sometime this summer. View full article

Matt Shaw played SS mostly exclusively at Maryland. Since being drafted by the Cubs he's played 34 games at 2b, for a total of 298.1 IP. Compare this to 67 games at 3b, or good for 580.1 IP. It would be incorrect to suggest that Matt Shaw has played more 2b. In fact, he's played 3b almost 2x more than 2b over the last two years. With playing SS in college (mostly) he's not an experienced second baseman by trade. It may be true that he's just better at second, but his experience at the position is pretty limited.

I dont mean to entirely brush this off, but there aren't many people who look like Moises Ballesteros across baseball. Regardless of defensive outcome, he's going to be breaking common molds if he becomes an MLB regular regardless, so it's a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy. I think we just have to accept whether he's a DH, a 1b, a C, he's going to be closer to a 1 of 1 than anything approaching the conventional.

Yeah the video looked good! The angle is a bit hard to fully see, so it could be that it looks a bit more drastic than it is in practice, but anything that gets him in closer to a more traditional baseball body will help him find a home defensively.

Ballesteros has moonlit at first base at every level he's played at. Currently, the Cubs depth chart at 1b reads like this: Michael Busch then...IDK? Jon Berti is probably the "backup" there currently (he's played 1b in the past) and he stands 5"10. Ballesteros is listed at 5"8, but if it's a tall 5"8/9 and a short 5"10 for Jon...one of those guys hits much better than the other. Owen Caissie has taken little to no time at 1b in his entire career. There's a strong argument to be made that if Ballesteros is hitting, and the Cubs lose Busch for 3+ weeks that you're going to see Ballesteros as a real option at 1b. Much like behind the plate, I would guess it's a few games at 1b, a few at DH, and a few behind the plate. I don't think he's going to be as "bad" of a 1b as you're giving him. He moves alright for his size - he's a little funny looking while he does it (tough recent videos maybe suggest more weight loss). I think given some time there, he'll be "okay". Josh Naylor isn't much taller and is built in a similarly "portly" manner, and just put a +1 OAA at 1b. Do think Ballesteros is winning a gold glove there? Maybe not. Do I think you can probably stick him there 40-50 games (like he can probably be stuck at C)? Yeah probably.