Jason Ross

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.

It's likely that most of the moves the Cubs did, they did independent of Bregman. Bregman far more feels like a circumstance of opportunities, not a plan dating back months (for example, why they signed Rea). Remember, they were heavily involved, in say, Tanner Scott weeks ago - and move almost assuredly impossible to achieve added with Bregman under the Cubs supposed budget. It means that they've shifted *to* Bregman, and likely because they think they can now get him under budget and on a short opt-out heavy deal when prior, that was not possible. I dont think the Cubs have really "missed" out on anyone else for this. They have have gone Braiser, over like, Robertson, but that's probably it. They can still cycle back and sign a Mark Canha as of today if they so wish. They already signed a 3b option in Berti, so it seems like they didn't miss on Moncada...more they went in another direction. This just feels more like a chance to get Bregman because it now fits and the market seems available to be opportunistic on it more than anything else.

The "we shouldn't have traded for Kyle Tucker with only 1 year" thing has been discussed to death. This is not the NBA where sign-and-trades happen at this magnitude. Betts and Lindor took months to get done, and Matt Olsen signed in his hometown growing up. This type of expectation is beyond the pale. Tucker may still be extended, but you either trade for him pre-extension or you just never trade for a 5 win player with 1 year. If he had more control the price would have been 2x. Lastly, there is very little chance the Cubs will sign Bregman for a true long term deal, though complaining about Heyward here, and not noticing how good Swanson has worked out feels...weird. It's been reported over and over that the Cubs have extended creative deals, likely heavily opt-out laden. So that fear is almost entirely something you can shelve. It's a very small possibility.

So much so I had to double take thinking it was...literally anyone else.

Youre good! All of these tule changes have my head spinning constantly.

I think we're a ways off from a full replacement system of balls and strikes. What's been discussed has been an integration of the "challenge" system in which a limited amount of ball and strike challenges throughout a game is allowed, but most framing would remain. As well, even then, pitch calling, working with a staff, blocking...these soft/hard skills will remain behind the plate. When you couple Ballesteros' rapid development of his bat, and his remaining progress to be made defensively, it's pretty unlikely that the two meet - the bat just outpaces the glove that much but it's good enough that he'll likely be in the MLB well before his glove could catchup. As well, Ballesteros' body is probably not suited for be a 100-120 game starter for a long time in his career. And I think that's okay, too. It may extend his career by limiting the amount of damage done to his knees. If the Cubs can get 30-50 games of him behind the plate, that's already a big boost.

Excluding the Padres, who are in a weird ownership-battle between children that could involve lawsuits, I think Hoerner's contract is good enough and Hoerner is good enough that even teams who are signaling that they might not be overly interested in adding money would consider it. At $10m real world cash, and four wins, and signed for two years...that's a pretty darn good deal. I really wouldn't be surprised to see teams like a Seattle be interested in that contract for prospects if it came to it, despite the public signal.

Moises Ballesteros is one of the most unique prospects in baseball, both in terms of his looks and what he can do with his bat relative to his position. When might we see Big Mo in the Show, and what might he bring to the table? Image courtesy of © Cody Scanlan/The Register / USA TODAY NETWORK We continue today looking at the Cubs' top 20 prospects (as ranked by our readers here at NSBB), with Moises Ballesteros, who comes in at No. 4 on that list. Before you read about him, though, don't miss our previous posts on the current state of the Cubs' farm system, with my looks 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 2024 Season Recap - Moises Ballesteros, C/1B Moises Ballesteros had another really fun season in 2024, cementing his name as one of the most exciting in the entire system. Already rapidly shooting through the system, enough that the 20-year-old started in Tennessee, Ballesteros didn't take long to settle in. In his first 68 plate appearances on the season, it became fairly clear that he wouldn't need to stay in Tennessee for the long haul, slashing .353/.443/.559, with a 198 wRC+, and walking nearly the same amount as he struck out. With great bat control, this was the best-case scenario you could imagine. Keeping up with that level of hitting would be nearly impossible, but the catcher would still manage a wonderful 137 wRC+ over the remaining 34 games he spent down at Double-A, posting nine home runs, nine doubles, and a triple in just under 60 games. More impressively, he had 39 singles compared to just 33 strikeouts - this is something you don't see often, even less so for someone his age. This would earn a promotion to Iowa for Mo Baller mid-way through June. At Iowa, some results were less exciting overall. Ballesteros would post a more pedestrian 106 wRC+ in Triple-A, seeing slight increases in his K% (over 21%) and a reduction of walks (around a 2% drop). However, he still had a .352 wOBA of .352 as a 20-year-old. So it could be argued that the wRC+ is also more impressive than first meets the eye. Reports on Ballesteros's defensive performance have suggested that improvements are being made. Throughout his time in the minors, we were occasionally shown him throwing out runners from behind the plate, which suggests that his arm strength is pretty good and that he's consistently making progress in the areas where he most needs it. 2025 Season Outlook and Scouting Report - ETA: 2025 As we enter the 2025 season, the Cubs will probably get a look at Moises Ballesteros at the MLB level. The bat is just too good to ignore entirely, and if the Cubs need a catcher or a DH, there will be a reason to think that Ballesteros will get a look there. You just don't find 20-year-olds with the approach that "Big Mo" has. However, a more compelling question rather than when we will see the portly catcher is in what capacity should we see him? As much as the bat plays, and we've heard positive movement defensively, the reality is that catchers and, generally speaking, baseball players just don't look like Moises Ballesteros very often. Perhaps it's a bit unfair to him to look at him through that lens, but as an outlier in that regard, it's probably something you can't ignore. With how fast his bat has progressed, it's also unsure if he will ever be given enough time to develop as a catcher long-term. Catching is one of those dark arts in the baseball world that takes time. You need a bit of cunning to learn how to steal strikes, the ability to call a good game, blocking, throwing... there's more that goes into being a defensive catcher than any other position on the field, and it takes time to marinate and meld that into a total package. But Ballesteros is hitting so well that, at some point, his ability to learn at lower levels will cease as he's called upon to play with the parent team, That is why I think the dream of Ballesteros being an every day, 100-game catcher is probably just that. It is a bit of a dream. How well would his body hold up in that role, and how would his glove hold up in that role? He has been a bit nervous. But also, it probably doesn't have to be so binary, either, to ask, "Is he even a catcher?" So I've come down on his best-case scenario in a role where he serves more as a 2nd/3rd catcher type - catching maybe two times a week while also shifting to first base and DH. The bat will play anywhere; it's that good, and you can still extract value a few times a week (maybe 30-50 times a year?) behind the plate, especially when you want extra thump. It'll probably also help increase the longevity of Ballesteros, helping protect his knees as he ages, which can sometimes shorten the career of hitters. Offensively, I want to point out a few things to pump our breaks on. While our 4th-ranked prospect shows an impressive approach at the plate, I'm not sure there's another elite offensive skill. His exit velocities sit more in the "good" not "great" territory, and the power is similarly in that 20 HR range rather than the 30+ range. That isn't necessarily a knock because a sum-of-the-parts argument must be made here. He's also young, so with age, development, and maybe a bit more body refinement, these things can get even better. Ultimately, we should all be excited. There's a good hitter here and a potentially great one. He will probably never be the de facto starting catcher, but I don't think he needs to be. And it's always fun to watch someone do something differently than everyone else. There just aren't many human beings like Mo Baller, and I'm excited to see him in Chicago when that time comes. View full article

Interesting. $3m to Moncada is very close to Berti's deal with the incentives factored in.

I know on the surface that a lot of people hate this Bregman in - Nico out (for prospects) idea, but I've tried to step back and examine it, and I think if we zoom out, there's logic behind it. Once again, the concept here is "flexibility". So how does it achieve that? - Currently, the Cubs could probably use a SP. If the Cubs accomplish the Bregman/Hoerner switcharoo, the Cubs don't change this math, probably, in any meaningful way. They can still have money under the LT (roughly $10m) to acquire, probably, any deadline deal SP you can imagine. On top of that, they recoup the prospects lost by signing Bregman and maybe then some - it could help pay for that SP at the deadline. - As well, this allows you to wait and see how prospects go. Matt wrote a cool article on Jordan Wicks. If you think Zombro can get Wicks' slider fixed, and say, mid-year. he's cooking, maybe you don't need that SP any more. By moving Hoerner for prospects, now you can fix another hole (say, that opened up via injury, or maybe you fix catcher if Amaya is tanking) in the event Wicks, Horton, Birdsell or Brown just run with a rotational spot and you don't need a SP as bad. - It gives the Cubs an offensive boost. Perhaps the two have similar value, but you can also see a pathway where if you get Bregman to change his swing decisions in a way closer to 2023-Bregman, you could conceivably add a win over Hoerner. - It shifts Matt Shaw to 2b. If we remain honest with ourselves, this is probably his best position, especially for his rookie season and settling his bat in. The bar is usually lower at 2b offensively. - The worry I see people having is that Bregman would opt out, leaving us with a hole, or maybe that the Cubs wouldn't be able to sign Tucker. And I get that. And there's a situation where you lose both. But that could conceivably open up a world of possibilities the next offseason in what looks like a pretty good free agent class. You could realistically be able to waltz into next offseason with a bunch of money once again, and a lot of flexibility. You could target Vlad, you could go after a SP like Gallen, or Cease...there's options. And you'd probably still have prospect capital. - This would also shift a need in 2027 to 2026. Currently we look to need to replace four starters in 2027...this would allow you to move that need a year up. Replacing four starters in one year is a lot of shopping. This helps you move that math around. It does create some risk. You do have less settled in the 2026 year than if you kept Hoerner. And you could possibly have Bregman have a terrible season and opt-in (though I think this feels pretty low). And I don't want to suggest that this is an amazing, super, uber awesome plan that I'd particularly do. But I also get this plan and can see the argument that this continues to give Hoyer flexibility within the 2025 season and beyond.

I know you're not arguing, no worries. I think we're just trying to show: 1. BBTV probably wouldn't be where we'd go to determine surplus value by highlighting these two. They have a very low value on Hoerner - they claim some sort of proprietary variables within their surplus value, and once we start adding their opinion in, you can mostly count me out. 2. That in a scenario where Clarke Schmidt was the trade, that the Cubs would need more returning from the Yankees to makeup that difference in value. 3. Instead, if it's some sort of a 1-1 swap for another SP, the Cubs would either need a better pitcher than Schmidt has been, or a pitcher with more control to offset that value. In the end, it's a like, almost a 100% moot point. Trueblood's article today made it pretty clear that a Hoerner trade seems to be focused on the prospect side of things for the time being. So I think any concern/worry/thoughts on Schmidt are probably wasted anyways.

You're far higher on Clarke Schmidt's trade value than I think it deserves. Clarke Schmidt is a somewhat interesting pitcher in terms of what he might do, but it's almost entirely theoretical at this stage. Normally, when we talk theoretical value, we usually are talking about, like, a 24 or 25 year old, not someone who's less than 30 days until his 29th birthday. His career fWAR is, essentially, the same as any one of the last three single seasons Hoerner has. I get seeing some interesting things with Schmidt, I can see them too. But Hoerner has age on his side, far less variance, and the cost between the two is $7m this year, and likely less next year (especially if Schmidt does well). Realistically, the only check box in Schmidt's corner is one year of control which is definitely not a nothing, but almost assuredly doesn't overshadow the significant variance difference in what they might be. Hoerner's a bang on high 3's-low 4's 2b, where as Clarke Schmidt is anything from "maybe an okay back end guy" to "maybe a 3 win SP" who's pitched a full slate just once in his career (and it was fine-ish but that's about it). I've had an issue with BBTV's surplus value on Hoerner dating back earlier this offseason in discussions with his value comparative to Mariner's SP and seeing it again reminds me how I think they have his surplus value significantly lower than it belongs at. I'd be much closer to KC's value myself.q

I don't think there's much of a worry that Bregman is going to head much further without signing. While I don't think position players face the uphill battle that pitchers do, we really haven't seen a position player work deep into spring training without signing for a while. The Cubs kick things off on the 9th, everyone is in by the 13th. It feels like if it doesn't happen today, I'd guess there's little/no chance he's going to wait this out past Sunday. Much like we saw Pete Alonso fall off the board yesterday, eventually Bregman is going to want to get a move on. He's got offers on the table (seemingly differently than Nick Pivetta who...talk about silence!). Whether it's Chicago, Toronto, Houston, Detroit. or Boston, he'll probably in camp right around the start somewhere.